THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  ILLINOIS 

LIBRARY 


IZG 

no.  Ift-ZO 
Cop.  t 


UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 

The  person  charging  this  material  is  responsible  for  its 

renewal  or  return  to  the  library  on  or  before  the  due 

date.  The  minimum  fee  for  a  lost  item  is  $125.00, 

$300.00  for  bound  journals. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books  are  reasons 

for  disciplinary  action  and  may  result  in  dismissal  from 

the  University.  Please  note:  self-stick  notes  may  result 

in  torn  pages  and  lift  some  inks. 

Renew  via  the  Telephone  Center  at  217-333-8400, 

846-262-1510  (toll-free)  or  circlib@uiuc.edu. 

Renew  online  by  choosing  the  My  Account  option  at: 

http://www.library.uiuc.edu/catalog/ 


BULLETIN  NO.   19 


BUREAU  OF  EDUCATIONAL  RESEARCH 
COLLEGE  OF  EDUCATION 


THE  PROGRESS 

AND  ELIMINATION  OF  SCHOOL 

CHILDREN  IN  ILLINOIS 

By 

Charles  W.  Odell 

Associate,  Bureau  of  Educational  Research 


PRICE  50  CENTS 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS,  URBANA 

1924 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

Page 

Preface 5 

Chapter  I.  Introduction 7 

Chapter  II.  Indices  of  Progress 14 

Chapter  III.  Age-Grade  Indices 31 

Chapter  IV.  The  Reliability  of  Age-Grade  Indices  as  Meas- 
ures OF  THE  Progress  of  Children  through  a  School 
System 39 

Chapter  V.  The  Holding  Power  of  the  School 46 

Chapter  VI.  The  Permanence  of  the  School  Population...   52 

Chapter  VII.  Class  Size  in  Elementary  Schools 58 

Chapter  VIII.  The  Effect  of  Departmental  Work  in  the 
Upper  Grades  Upon  Progress 63 

Chapter  IX.  The  Distribution  of  One  Thousand  Children 
AT  Each  Age 66 

Appendix  A.  The  Forms  Used  in  Collecting  Data 70 

Appendix  B.  The  School  Systems  that  Participated 74 

Appendix  C.  Non-Resident  Pupils 75 

Appendix  D.  Kindergartens 76 


PREFACE 

As  a  result  of  the  studies  of  Maxwell,  Thorndike,  Strayer  and 
Ayres,  school  administrators  have  come  to  realize  that  the  rate  of 
progress  of  pupils  through  a  school  system  is  a  significant  index  of 
its  efficiency.  The  usual  method  of  computing  this  index  is  by  means 
of  the  well-known  age-grade  table,  but  a  study  of  this  procedure  re- 
veals that  it  is  faulty.  In  this  bulletin  Dr.  Odell  presents  an  extended 
inquiry  into  the  validity  of  the  age-grade  procedure  and  shows  con- 
clusively that  the  results  obtained  by  it  can  not  be  accepted  as  a 
valid  index  of  the  efficiency  of  a  school  system. 

Educational  research  is  rapidly  extending  its  influence  over 
educational  practice.  If  this  influence  is  to  be  beneficial,  it  is  im- 
perative that  faulty  techniques  in  the  collection  and  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  data  be  discovered  and  discarded.  Formerly,  when  much 
less  significance  was  attached  to  statistical  tables  and  to  other  results 
of  research,  responsibility  for  carefully  scrutinizing  the  procedure 
used  was  less  than  today  when  an  announcement  made  upon  quan- 
titative data  is  likely  to  be  accepted  widely  and  to  effect  significant 
changes  in  educational  practice.  Thus,  investigations  of  the  type 
represented  in  this  bulletin  should  be  welcomed  by  those  engaged 
in  the  administration  of  our  schools  as  well  as  by  those  primarily 
interested  in  problems  of  educational  research. 

The  investigation  reported  by  Dr.  Odell  is  based  upon  the 
cooperation  of  a  large  number  of  superintendents,  to  all  of  whom  the 
Bureau  of  Educational  Research  gratefully  acknowledges  its 
indebtedness. 

Walter  S.  Monroe,  Director. 
March  26,  1924 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign 


http://www.archive.org/details/progresseliminat19odel 


THE  PROGRESS  AND  ELIMINATION  OF  SCHOOL 
CHILDREN  IN  ILLINOIS 

CHAPTER  I 
INTRODUCTION 

Development  of  interest  in  measures  of  progress  and  elimina- 
tion of  school  children.  Within  the  last  twenty  years  measures  of 
the  progress  of  school  children  have  come  to  be  recognized  as  sig- 
nificant indices  of  the  efficiency  of  a  school  system.  Two  types  of 
measures  of  the  progress  of  children  through  a  school  system  have 
been  used.  The  first  has  been  computed  from  age-grade  tables/  and 
includes  the  "average  over-ageness,"  the  "percent  of  pupils  over-age 
or  retarded,"  the  "percent  of  pupils  at-age  or  normal,"  and  the  "per- 
cent of  pupils  under-age  or  accelerated."  These  measures  will  be 
referred  to  in  this  bulletin  as  "age-grade  indices."  The  second  type 
of  measures  may  be  called  "indices  of  progress"  and  are  computed 
from  tables  showing  years  (semesters)^  in  school  and  years  (semes- 
ters) of  progress.  This  type  includes  the  "average  rate  of  progress," 
i.e.,  "average  number  of  years  (semesters)  of  progress  made  in  one 
year  (semester)  of  time,"  the  "percent  of  pupils  making  fast  pro- 
gress," the  "percent  of  pupils  making  regular  progress,"  and  the 
"percent  of  pupils  making  slow  progress." 

School  administrators  have  become  interested  also  in  measures 
of  the  extent  to  which  children  leave  school  in  the  upper  grades  and 
the  high  school  and  indices  of  elimination  have  frequently  been 
calculated  in  connection  with  studies  of  progress.^ 

One  of  the  first  prominent  educators  to  become  interested  in 
measures  of  the  progress  and  elimination  of  school  children  was 
Superintendent  W.  T.  Harris  of  St.  Louis.  Over  fifty  years  ago  he 
called  attention  to  the  significance  of  these  measures,  but  in  this,  as 
in  other  matters,  he  was  ahead  of  his  time  and  failed  to  arouse  any 
general  interest.  Practically  no  attention  was  given  to  either  progress 


'An  age-grade  table  is  one  which  gives  the  number  of  pupils  of  each  age  group 
belonging  to  each  grade.  For  an  illustration  of  this  type  of  table  see  Table  XIII, 
page  32. 

'In  some  tables  of  this  kind  the  semester  has  been  used  instead  of  the  year. 
For  an  illustration  see  Table  I,  page  15. 

'See  Chapter  V  for  a  description  of  the  indices  of  elimination. 

[7] 


or  elimination  until  1904.  In  this  year  Superintendent  Maxwell  of 
New  York  City  included  in  his  annual  report*  an  age-grade  study  of 
the  elementary  schools  of  that  city.  This  publication  stimulated  other 
superintendents  and  influenced  them  to  include  similar  studies  in 
their  annual  reports.  A  number  of  rather  comprehensive  investiga- 
tions were  also  made,  of  which  Thorndike's  study,  "The  Elimination 
of  Pupils  from  School,"^  in  1907  appears  to  have  been  the  first.  It 
was  concerned  chiefly  with  elimination  but  some  attention  was  given 
to  retardation  and  acceleration.  A  couple  of  years  later  (1909)  Ayres 
published  a  somewhat  more  comprehensive  investigation  under  the 
title  "Laggards  in  Our  Schools."^  Although  Ayres'  report  is  con- 
cerned chiefly  with  age-grade  and  elimination  data,  one  chapter  deals 
with  progress.  This  seems  to  be  the  first  instance  in  which  indices 
of  progress  are  mentioned  in  any  well-known  publication.  In  1911 
Strayer  published  a  study^  which  presented  age-grade  data  for  a 
number  of  city  school  systems,  colleges,  and  universities.  The  same 
year  two  other  books  appeared,  one^  of  which  deals  chiefly  with  the 
progress  of  pupils  rather  than  with  age-grade  conditions  and  the 
other^  with  retardation. 

Since  these  early  studies  there  have  been  numerous  others  treat- 
ing various  phases  of  progress  and  elimination.  Among  the  more 
recent  is  a  report^''  by  Ayres  which  deals  with  both  indices  of  pro- 
gress and  age-grade  indices.   About  the  same  time  Hill  and  Railey^^ 


*Maxwell,  W.  H.  "SLxth  annual  report  of  the  city  superintendent  of  schools," 
New  York,  1904,  p.  42-49. 

"Thomdike,  E.  L.  "The  elimination  of  pupils  from  school."  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Education  Bulletin  No.  4.    Washington,  1907.    63  p. 

"Ayres,  L.  P.  "Laggards  in  Our  Schools."  New  York:  Charities  Publication 
Committee,  1909.   246  p. 

'Strayer,  G.  D.  "Age  and  grade  census  of  schools  and  colleges."  U.  S.  Bureau 
of  Education  Bulletin  No.  5.   Washington,  1911.    144  p. 

*Keyes,  C.  H.  "Progress  through  the  grades  of  city  schools."  Teachers  College 
Contributions  to  Education,  No.  42.  New  York:  Teachers  College,  Columbia  Uni- 
versity,  1911.    79  p. 

°Blan,  L.  B.  "A  special  study  of  the  incidence  of  retardation."  Teachers  Col- 
lege Contributions  to  Education,  No.  40.  New  York:  Teachers  College,  Columbia 
University,  1911.    Ill  p. 

"Ayres,  L.  P.  "Child  accounting  in  the  public  schools."  Sur\'ey  Committee  of 
the  Cleveland  Foundation.  Cleveland,  Ohio,  1915.    68  p. 

"Hill,  D.  S.  and  Railey,  Mary  L.  Educational  Research  in  Public  Schools. 
Part  I.  Comparative  Measurements  of  the  Progress  in  a  School  of  36.000  children 
at  New  Orleans,  p.  11-35.  Part  II.  A  Practical  Study  of  the  Elimination  of  Pupils 
from  the  New  Orleans  Public  Schools,  p.  39-161.  New  Orleans:  Board  of 
Education,  1915. 

[8] 


published  an  unusually  complete  study  of  progress  and  elimination 
in  New  Orleans.  Some  years  later  Hill/^  in  a  brief  discussion  pointed 
-out  that  progress  is  more  potent  than  age  at  entrance  in  determining 
age  in  grade,  and  states  that  70  percent  of  retardation  is  due  to 
failure.  The  Virginia  Survey/^  which  appeared  in  1920,  also  de- 
voted some  attention  to  progress  as  well  as  to  age-grade  data.  Re- 
cently Superintendent  Ettinger^*  of  New  York  City  has  used  both 
kinds  of  data  in  studying  the  status  of  the  public  schools  of  New 
York  City. 

Indices  of  progress  versus  age-grade  indices.  An  examination 
of  the  studies  mentioned  above  and  of  many  others  that  have  ap- 
peared during  recent  years  shows  that  there  has  been  a  steady  in- 
crease in  the  use  of  "indices  of  progress"  in  preference  to  "age-grade 
indices"  as  measures  of  the  progress  of  children  through  school  sys- 
tems. However,  age-grade  indices  are  still  used  by  a  majority  of 
school  men.  This  is  probably  due  to  two  facts:  first,  it  has  beeij 
assumed  that  the  correlation  between  the  two  types  of  indices  is  so 
high  that  one  can  be  used  for  the  other;  and  secondly,  age-grade 
data  are  more  easily  secured  than  the  data  necessary  to  compute 
indices  of  progress.  Unfortunately,  the  records  of  many  of  our  school 
systems,  if  they  exist  at  all,  are  in  such  condition  that  the  history  of 
pupils  can  not  be  traced  back  to  the  time  of  entrance.  The  trend 
toward  the  use  of  indices  of  progress,  as  well  as  the  opinions  of 
those  who  have  given  serious  attention  to  the  problems,  indicates 
that  indices  of  progress  are  to  be  preferred  to  age-grade  indices. 
However,  there  is  available  no  comprehensive  investigation  showing 
the  relative  merits  of  these  two  types  of  measures  of  progress. 

The  major  problem  of  this  study.  The  major  problem  of  this 
study  is  to  determine  the  reliability  or  accuracy  of  age-grade  indices 
as  measures  of  the  progress  of  pupils  through  a  school  system.  In 
dealing  with  this  problem  a  comparison  will  be  made  between  age- 
grade  indices  and  the  corresponding  indices  of  progress. 

Minor  problems  studied.  The  data  collected  furnished  an  op- 
portunity for  the  study  of  several  minor  problems: 


"Hill,  D.  S.  "Remaming  errors  in  measures  of  retardation,"  Elementary 
School  Journal,  19:200-12,  May,  1919. 

"Inglis,  A.  J.  et  al.  Virginia  Public  Schools.  Part  I.  Chapter  IV:  Progress  of 
Pupils  In  the  Schools,  p.  79-95.    Yonkers:    World  Book  Company,  1920. 

"Ettingcr,  W.  L.  "Facing  the  facts,"  Bulletin  of  High  Points  in  the  Work  of 
the  High  Schools  of  New  York  City,  4:3-15,  October,  1922. 

[9] 


(1)  A  determination  of  age-grade  indices  and  indices  of 
progress  for  ninety-six^^  school  systems  in  Illinois. 

(2)  A  determination  of  an  index  of  elimination  or,  stating  it 
conversely,  an  index  of  the  holding  power,  of  the  same  school 
systems. 

(3)  A  determination  of  the  extent  to  which  children  migrate 
from  one  school  to  another. 

(4)  A  study  of  the  size  of  class  in  elementary  schools. 

(5)  A  study  of  departmental  work  in  elementary  schools. 

Nature  and  source  of  data.  The  data  on  which  this  investiga- 
tion is  based  were  gathered  in  the  autumn  of  1922  through  the  co- 
operation of  a  large  number  of  superintendents,  principals  and 
teachers.  A  letter  was  addressed  to  the  superintendents  and  high- 
school  principals  of  Illinois  inviting  them  to  cooperate  in  the  study. 
To  those  who  replied  favorably  there  were  sent  a  "supplementary 
questionnaire"  and  a  sufficient  number  of  copies  of  the  "progress 
record  blank"  for  their  school  systems."  The  supplementary  ques- 
tionnaire asked  for  information  concerning  the  general  organization 
of  the  school  system,  the  relation  of  the  boundaries  of  the  districts 
to  the  city  limits,  and  the  attendance  at  parochial  and  private 
schools.  The  progress  record  blank  called  for  the  following  items  of 
information  for  each  pupil  enrolled  in  the  school:  (1)  name,  (2) 
resident  or  non-resident,  (3)  age  last  birthday,  (4)  date  of  next 
birthday,  (5)  date  of  entering  school  in  this  city,  (6)  grade  entered, 
(7)  grade  at  present,  (8)  number  of  times  failed  of  promotion,  (9) 
number  of  times  skipped,  (10)  number  of  semesters  out  of  school, 
(11)  for  high  schools  only,  (a)  number  of  semester  credits,  (b) 
number  of  credits  lost  by  failure,  (c)  date  of  entering  high  school. 

It  will  be  noted  that  these  items  have  been  chosen  so  that  it 
is  possible  to  make  a  partial  check  upon  the  accuracy  of  the  entries. 
For  example  "semesters  of  progress"  is  found  by  taking  the  differ- 
ence between  items  7  and  6,  and  is  also  equal  to  the  number  of 
semesters  which  have  elapsed  since  the  pupil  entered  his  present 
school  minus  the  number  of  semesters  failed  or  out  of  school  plus 
the  number  of  semesters  of  work  skipped.  By  computing  the 
"semesters  of  progress"  in  both  of  these  ways  many  errors  in  the 


^°These  96  systems  include  the  elementary  or  high  schools,  or  both,  of  92 
cities  and  towns,  and  rural  elementary  schools  in  four  counties.  A  list  of  them  is 
given  in  Appendix  B. 

'This  questionnaire  and  the  progress  record  blank  are  reproduced  in  Appendix  A, 

[10] 


original  data  were  detected  and  appropriate  corrections  made.  Other 
errors  were  also  apparent  and  easily  corrected.  When  it  was  not 
possible  to  infer  what  correction  should  be  made,  a  letter  was  ad- 
dressed to  the  superintendent  or  principal  who  had  supplied  the 
data,  calling  his  attention  to  the  errors  and  asking  for  corrections. 
The  records  of  about  10,000  children  were  corrected  in  this  way. 
The  use  of  these  two  methods  for  correcting  the  original  data  and 
the  care  with  which  the  computations  and  tabulations  were  made, 
cause  the  writer  to  believe  that  the  errors  in  this  investigation  have 
been  reduced  to  an  exceedingly  low  minimum. 

Number  and  distribution  of  cooperating  school  systems.  Data 
were  secured  from  eighty-two  elementary  school  systems  and  fifty- 
one  high  schools,  representing  in  all  ninety-two  different  commun- 
ities. In  addition  three  counties  contributed  data  for  most  or  all  of 
their  elementary  rural  schools  and  one  other  county  furnished  data 
for  a  few  schools  which  the  county  superintendent  considered  a  fair 
sample  of  all  those  in  the  county.  In  all,  usable  individual  records 
were  obtained  for  approximately  67,000  resident  pupils;  of  whom 
about  53,000  were  in  city  and  town  elementary  schools,  5,500  in 
rural  elementary  schools  and  8,500  in  high  schools.  Data  for  about 
3,000  non-resident  pupils  were  also  obtained,  but  are  used  only  in 
the  study  of  class  size.  With  this  exception,  all  statements  in  the 
following  chapters  refer  to  resident  pupils. 

The  school  systems  contributing  data  were  well  distributed 
geographically.  If  the  three  sections  into  which  the  state  is  divided 
for  the  election  of  members  of  the  Illinois  State  Teachers  Examining 
Board  are  taken,  the  distribution  of  system  is  as  follows: 

Northern 

Number  of  Elementary   School   Systems 42 

Number  of   High   Schools 25 

Percent  of  Pupils 47 

The  number  of  schools  as  well  as  the  percent  of  pupils  is  larger 
for  the  northern  section  than  for  either  of  the  others.  However,  the 
northern  section  of  the  state  includes  a  much  greater  portion  of  the 
total  population  of  the  state.  Omitting  Chicago,  which  took  no  part 
in  the  study,  the  percents  of  the  total  population  of  the  state  found 
in  the  three  sections  are  45,  29  and  26,  respectively.  The  distribution 
of  the  pupils  included  in  the  study  in  the  three  sections  when  ex- 
pressed as  percents  agrees  very  closely  with  the  distribution  of  the 

[11] 


Central 

Southern 

23 

17 

16 

10 

26 

27 

population.  Thus  we  may  see  that  with  respect  to  the  general  geo- 
graphical distribution,  the  town  and  city  schools  participating  in  this 
investigation  may  be  considered  fairly  typical  of  the  state  as  a  whole. 
In  the  case  of  the  rural  schools  the  same  claim  can  not  be  made  as 
four  counties  out  of  102  are  not  enough  to  constitute  a  fair  sampling; 
although  the  geographical  distribution  of  the  counties  cooperating, 
two  in  the  northern  section,  one  in  the  central,  and  one  in  the 
southern,  makes  the  data  more  representative  of  rural  schools  than 
if  all  the  four  counties  had  been  from  the  same  section. 

Grouping  of  school  systems.  In  order  to  facilitate  comparisons 
between  schools  similar  in  size  and  type  of  organization,  the  follow- 
ing grouping  was  made: 

Elementary  Schools  High  Schools 


„,  Population  Number  „,  „      ,,  Number 

Class  i  nu  t  Q    *  ™-        Class  Lnrollment  ,  c    * 

of  City  of  Systems  of  Systems 

I        30,000  or  more 3  A  500  or  more 3 

II        10,000-29,999 8  B  300-499 8 

III  2.500-9,999 30  C  100-299 24 

IV  Less  than  2,500 41  D  1-100    (4  yr.) 11 

E        2  and  3  year 5 

Within  each  of  these  classes  a  further  grouping  was  made  to  bring 
together  those  systems  in  which  annual  and  those  in  which  semester 
or  semi-annual  promotions  prevailed.  In  a  number  of  school  systems 
a  combination  of  these  two  types  of  organization  was  found,  and  the 
system  was  arbitrarily  placed  in  one  or  the  other  of  these  two  groups. 
In  case  one  type  of  organization  prevailed  in  the  elementary 
school  and  the  other  type  in  the  high  school  of  a  given  city,  each 
division  of  the  system  was  classified  according  to  its  plan  of  organi- 
zation. A  few  elementary  schools  were  found  in  which  annual  pro- 
motions prevailed  in  certain  grades  or  buildings  and  semi-annual  in 
others,  and  were  classified  as  having  the  semester  plan  of  organiza- 
tion. In  one  or  two  systems  promotions  were  made  at  the  end  of 
each  term  in  at  least  some  of  the  grades,  and  these  also  were  placed 
with  the  semester  group. 

In  the  study  of  elimination,  it  was  necessary  to  combine  the 
elementary  and  high-school  data  for  those  systems  which  supplied 
both.  The  term  "single  unit  system"  is  used  to  designate  those  in 
which  the  elementary  and  high-school  districts  are  coterminous.  In 
almost  all  cases  this  means  that  they  are  under  the  control  of  the 

[12] 


same  school  board.  The  term  "whole  systems  not  coterminous"  is 
used  for  those  communities  in  which  the  boundaries  of  the  elemen- 
tary and  of  the  high-school  districts  do  not  coincide.  In  combining 
the  data  from  the  two  divisions  of  such  systems  for  the  study  of 
elimination,  appropriate  adjustments  were  made  so  that  only  those 
high-school  pupils  living  in  the  elementary-school  districts  were 
included. 

Rural  schools  were  grouped  according  to  whether  they  were 
one-room  or  two  to  four-room  schools,  but  since  no  significant  dif- 
ferences were  found  except  in  class  size  this  classification  is  not  re- 
tained in  the  tables  of  this  report. 

Procedure  followed  in  irregular  cases.  Pupils  who  entered 
school  at  some  time  other  than  at  the  beginning  of  the  year  or 
semester  were  considered  as  having  entered  at  the  beginning.  An 
exception  was  made  in  the  case  of  rural-school  pupils  who  entered 
the  first  grade  in  March  or  later  and  remained  there  all  of  the  next 
year;  they  were  placed  with  the  group  entering  school  the  following 
September.  In  some  instances  it  was  not  stated  whether  the  pupil 
was  a  resident  or  non-resident,  and  it  was  assumed  that  he  lived 
within  the  district. 

The  data  from  six  or  eight  systems  were  peculiar  in  that  they 
were  not  complete  or  that  the  plan  of  organization  was  so  different 
that  they  could  not  be  handled  in  the  usual  manner.  In  these  cases 
the  data  were  transmuted  into  an  equivalent  form  similar  to  that 
received  from  the  other  systems.  For  example,  in  systems  having 
the  term  plan  of  organization,  the  pupils  in  Grade  I  C  and  one-half 
of  those  in  I  B  were  grouped  together  to  represent  those  who  would 
be  in  I  B  in  a  system  organized  on  the  semester  basis,  and  the  other 
half  of  those  in  I  B  and  all  in  I  A,  to  represent  those  who  would  be 
in  I  A.  In  doing  this  the  I  B  pupils  were  paired  on  the  basis  of  the 
measure  being  used  and  one  of  each  pair  assigned  to  I  B,  the  other 
to  I  A. 


[13] 


CHAPTER   II 
INDICES  OF  PROGRESS 

The  indices  of  progress  used.  The  following  indices  of  progress 
were  calculated:  (1)  "average  progress  per  semester  or  year,"  (2) 
"percent  of  pupils  making  fast  progress,"  (3)  "percent  of  pupils 
making  regular  progress,"  (4)  "percent  of  pupils  making  slow 
progress."  In  the  calculation  of  these  indices  of  progress  all  non- 
resident pupils  were  excluded.  In  systems  having  annual  promotions 
the  "average  progress"  is  calculated  by  dividing  the  total  number  of 
years  of  progress  made  by  all  pupils^  by  the  total  number  of  years 
spent  in  school.  A  corresponding  definition  of  "average  progress" 
may  be  stated  for  school  systems  having  semi-annual  promotions. 
The  "percent  of  pupils  making  fast  progress"  is  the  percent  of 
pupils  whose  years  (semesters)  of  progress  are  more  than  the 
years  (semesters)  they  have  spent  in  the  school  system.  The  "per- 
cent of  pupils  making  regular  progress"  is  the  percent  whose  years 
(semesters)  of  progress  equal  the  number  of  years  (semesters) 
spent  in  school.  The  "percent  making  slow  progress"  is  the  percent 
of  pupils  whose  years  (semesters)  of  progress  are  less  than  the 
number  of  years  (semesters)  spent  in  school. 

Method  of  calculating  indices  of  progress.  In  calculating  the 
"indices  of  progress"  the  facts  relating  to  years  (semesters)  in 
school  and  years  (semesters)  of  progress  were  assembled  in  a 
progress  table.  Such  a  tabulation  for  all  city  and  town  elementary 
schools  is  shown  in  Table  I.  In  some  of  these  schools  annual  pro- 
motions prevailed  and  in  others  children  were  promoted  at  the  end 
of  each  semester.  This  table  is  to  be  read  as  follows:  the  entries 
on  the  first  line  of  the  table  are  for  pupils  who  have  made  no 
progress,  that  is,  who  are  in  the  beginning  grade  of  the  school.  Of 
the  total  number,  9634  have  spent  no  semesters  in  school,  that  is, 
they  entered  in  September,  1922;  225  have  spent  one  semester  in 
school;  1305,  two  semesters  in  school;  6,  three  semesters  in  school; 
and  so  on  to  2  pupils  who  have  made  no  progress  but  have  spent 


^This  refers  only  to  the  progress  made  by  the  pupils  in  the  school  in  which 
they  were  enrolled  in  September,  1922.  A  similar  statement  applies  to  the  total 
number  of  years  spent  in  school. 

[14] 


^ 

0 

LO 

^ 

OO 

00 

o 

VO 

NO 

t^ 

tn 

00 

t^ 

c^ 

c 

Ol 

o 

c2 

»n 

■* 

uri 

00 

ON 

IJ-l 

-»> 

00 

o\ 

■* 

On 

•* 

t^ 

O-l 

oo 

to 

to 

0^ 

00 

'■^ 

c^ 

NO 

IS 

u> 

rs 

^ 

« 

o 

ra 

-> 

•* 

C^ 

1^ 

^ 

rt 

M« 

o 

trj 

O 

tn 

^O 

t^ 

00 

to 

I          V 

r-i 

^ 

_ 

^ 

ry) 

rrt 

u^ 

•o 

e*-i 

CM 

f^i 

^^ 

f-4 

'^ 

o 

O 

O 

o 

o 

O 

1—1 

— 

- 

-" 

- 

- 

- 

^ 

-^ 

- 

'- 

- 

- 

-^ 

^ 

^ 

^ 

■^ 

1^ 

^M 

CN 

1—1 

CN 

oo 

r^ 

^o 

O 

to 

ON 

lO 

oo 

CO 

ON 

-*> 

X 

m 

LO 

ro 

c^ 

NO 

o. 

^ 

h 

~" 

1 

,_, 

^^ 

r^ 

o 

r*^ 

,_) 

_ 

O 

U-) 

O) 

s 

^^ 

,_) 

•— 1 

CN 

t(-J 

O 

-P 

CH 

^^ 

r^ 

ON 

^ 

CN 

,^ 

cn 

C4 

rsi 

c-» 

r^j 

o 

ti-i 

NO 

,^ 

^_, 

^^ 

,_) 

ON 

^ 

^^ 

ON 

'^ 

•— • 

•o 

,_t 

r^ 

r^ 

,—, 

U-) 

O 

OO 

,— . 

r^ 

to 

•^ 

— « 

CO 

,— , 

,-4 

r-4 

u-i 

On 

M 

r-^ 

-»*• 

O 

c 

ro 

■"* 

•^ 

cs 

r^ 

^ 

ON 

ro 

ro 

u-i 

ON 

to 

r^ 

VO 

ro 

u-v 

\n 

•^ 

00 

'^ 

-H 

LTj 

00 

j-^ 

r^ 

CN 

^0 

ON 

^^ 

r^ 

c^ 

ON 

'~' 

(M 

0 

,—1 

-^ 

«^ 

00 

o 

GO 

»J^ 

o 

00 

'^ 

oo 

CM 

o 

g 

0 

cn 

o 

J= 

r*-i 

-* 

o 

C/3 

l~> 

en 

ON 

C^ 

ro 

u^ 

*t* 

-f 

to 

o 

^ 

(^ 

o 

fo 

-^ 

OS 

f^ 

ON 

k. 

'^ 

^ 

c*-i 

r^ 

f^J 

1^ 

■^ 

<-ri 

<~^ 

'*f 

CM 

NO 

•-H 

ro 

r^j 

,-4 

oo 

w 

2 

'" 

^O 

^ 

O 

o\ 

r-- 

a\ 

TO 

cs 

S 

°°. 

s 

— ^ 

PO 

r^ 

,_ 

■^ 

f^ 

o\ 

(-^ 

r^ 

r*-, 

o 

^ 

<N 

CO 

o 

^H 

o 

CO 

"" 

■^ 

■^ 

OJ 

O 

,^ 

<X> 

ON 

to 

en 

Cs) 

oo 

ON 

to 

TO 

,_, 

r^ 

^^ 

o 

>o 

o 

00 

m 

On 

t-vj 

r^i 

"" 

r-. 

$ 

r-j 

r^ 

'^ 

UO 

r*-i 

-* 

o 

a\ 

NO 

rvi 

On 

\o 

- 

r^ 

^*^ 

- 

0-, 

l^ 

»-H 

LTl 

NO 

.TN 

i-n 

tj-i 

CS 

u-i 

O 

oo 

^ 

^ 

O 

00 

■<f 

ON 

= 

^ 

r*^ 

l^ 

- 

oo 

CN 

_ 

,_, 

r^ 

-♦> 

oo 

(^ 

M3 

,^ 

f^, 

,« 

C' 

t^ 

o 

^^ 

r*^ 

^ 

^^ 

ON 

U-, 

*Tt* 

r^ 

CT, 

ro 

■* 

>o 

t^ 

to 

vo 

m 

m 

t-^ 

•— ' 

,_, 

,_ 

O^ 

-^ 

M3 

^^ 

CN 

NT) 

"^ 

r^ 

00 

ON 

oo 

r^ 

NO 

ON 

sO 

QO 

00 

r^ 

CNJ 

00 

-t 

o 

<— ' 

■^ 

•^ 

r^ 

^^ 

»-o 

r^ 

f— 1 

C^ 

r^ 

-^ 

NO 

ON 

1^ 

On 

(V) 

^ 

,_ 

r^ 

s 

r*^ 

'■^ 

On 

r^ 

o 

ON 

00 

r*-^ 

NO 

^ 

s 

u-i 

o 

T^ 

^H 

O 

lO 

r^ 

00 

^ 

r^ 

C^ 

,-4 

On 

o 

vo 

NO 

V.             * 

""o  M 

O 

— 

r^ 

<^ 

■* 

un 

^ 

t^ 

00 

as 

O 

— 

2 

CO 

-^ 

lO 

M  S 

S     £ 

0 

SP 

H 

<a- 

ten  semesters  in  school.  The  average  rate  can  not  be  computed,  as 
these  pupils  have  made  no  progress.  None  of  them  have  gained 
time,  85  percent  have  neither  gained  nor  lost  time,  and  15  percent 
have  lost  time.  Table  II  presents  the  same  sort  of  data  for  high 
schools.  Tables  similar  to  these  were  constructed  for  each  school 
system  and  for  each  group  of  school  systems.  In  addition  to  being 
a  means  of  computing  indices  of  progress  such  a  table  is  illuminating 
concerning  one  phase  of  the  general  status  of  schools.  The  extreme 
variability  is  perhaps  the  most  notable  characteristic  of  these  tables. 

In  computing  the  time  spent  by  those  children  recorded  in  a 
column  of  Table  I,  the  total  of  the  column  is  multiplied  by  the 
number  at  the  top.  For  example,  8249  is  multiplied  by  2,  giving  a 
total  of  16498.  The  semesters  of  progress  for  a  column  group  of 
children  is  computed  by  multiplying  each  entry  in  the  column  by 
the  number  of  semesters  of  progress  made  by  those  children. 
For  example,  in  the  third  column  of  Table  I  the  computation  is: 
1305  X0  =  0;  611  X  1=611;  6034X2=12068;  193  x3  =  579; 
100X4  =  400;  3  X5  =  15;  3  X6=18.  The  sum  of  these  pro- 
ducts, 13691,  gives  the  semesters  of  progress  made  by  all  of  the 
children  recorded  in  the  column.  This  sum  divided  by  the  semesters 
in  school  (16498)  gives  the  "average  progress"  .83,  which  is  entered 
in  the  last  row  of  the  table.  A  reversal  of  the  process  yields  the 
"average  rate"  of  a  row,  that  is,  the  average  number  of  semesters 
(years)  required  to  make  one  semester  (year)  of  progress. 

General  indices  of  progress  for  elementary  schools  in  Illinois. 
As  may  be  seen  in  Table  I  the  average  progress  for  all  elementary-  I 
school  pupils  is  .89.  This  means  that  on  the  average  pupils  in  the 
elementary  schools  have  made  .89  semester  (year)  of  progress  for 
each  semester  (year)  spent  in  school.  Assuming  that  the  data 
collected  in  this  investigation  are  representative  of  conditions  in  the 
state  outside  of  Chicago,  this  figure  may  be  taken  as  a  general 
index  of  progress  in  the  elementary  schools  of  towns  and  cities  in 
Illinois.  An  average  progress  of  .89  means  that  the  average  pupil 
now  in  school  has  progressed  at  a  rate  which  if  maintained  would 
require  him  to  spend  approximately  nine  years  in  completing  the 
eight  grades  of  the  elementary  school.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  our  | 
elementary  school  system  is  nominally  one  of  eight  years  and  is 
generally  considered  so,  this  condition  is  peculiarly  significant.  When 
we  recall  that  a  number  of  educators  are  very  insistent  that  the  work 

[16] 


C/5 

Oh 
I-Ih 

o 

o 
o 

W 


_0 

oo'-"c^r-~cNr^O\f^ 

CO 

r-5  _  c-5  —  (N        — 

C/0 

c 

60 

r4or--o^-*'Or~- 

CS 

0\\DooTfoocNoorJ 

oo 

0^ 

C/] 

OOOc^CSON^O 

U-1 

es      T}.      vo 

^r. 

«    B 

■  vo  o  00  M3  r-~  — •  n 

oo 

•  c^  — c  o  o  ON  o  a\ 

O 

< 

"rt 

~or^'j^"^t^'~ooo 

wi 

CO 

i^tNt^Jij^oor^ONOo 

ON 

ON 

O 

OTt<Oc^<^cSoo-^ 

Ul 

H 

tn      (N      — 

00 

o 

—                  ro  — 

wo 

^  c^  (N 

^0 

ON 

ON 

so 

CO  -H  Tj-  c^  uo  -^ 

r-- 

, 

00 

—        ■^  CN 

oo 

r^ 

CN  (N  so  ^  — 1 

r^ 

_ 

r-- 

CS  w-i 

oo 

ON 

"o 

o 

cN-Hir-vQor-^iv-iOO 

oo 

so 

J= 

^ 

-H               ,^    ^    f^    rt 

oo 

ON 

(J 

-H              r^    r-l 

O 

en 

Tf    Tfl   VO   t<   NO   CO 

O 

0\ 

CO 

u-> 

—  CO  VO— 1 

Tf 

oo 

u 

u 

VI 

<u 

\0  ■*■  (N  i^  Tt"  -f  O 

to 

■* 

£ 

CD 

■* 

^         CN  O  oo  oo  CO 

\0 

CN 

»— «    <— 1     ^—    T-H 

VO 

•— ' 

»— ' 

t^  oo  cs  r^  — 

>j-i 

«-o 

ro 

Tt-   Tf   CN 

CN 

ON 

r-  o  ON  CO  •* 

CO 

ra 

CN 

>-n  c^  '-n  ao 

ON 

Tj-  oo  ■* 

SO 

SO 

tn  oo 

CO 

OO 

r-»       —1 

CO 

(N 

CN 

o 

CO 

OO 
CN 

^ 

u5 

<u 

sters 
ress 

O  —  csco-^tosor^ 

o 

|o^ 

^ 

c^    £ 

rt 

OJ 

O 

> 

H 

< 

[17] 


of  the  elementary  school  should  be  done  in  seven  years,  the  fact 
that  our  present  system  in  Illinois  is  essentially  a  nine-year  system 
is  given  added  significance. 

Taking  the  state  as  a  whole,-  approximately  one  pupil  in  twenty 
has  been  allowed  to  make  fast  time,  slightly  less  than  one  in  three 
has  lost  time  and  approximately  two-thirds  have  made  regular 
progress.  It  perhaps  should  be  noted  that  this  statement  refers  only 
to  the  time  which  pupils  have  spent  in  the  system  in  which  they 
were  found  November,  1922.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  if  the 
complete  records  of  pupils  were  available  there  would  be  little 
change  in  the  indices. 

It  will  be  seen  also  from  Table  I  that,  between  the  range  of 
three  and  fifteen  semesters  in  school,  there  appears  to  be  no  relation- 
ship between  the  number  of  semesters  that  pupils  have  been  in 
school  and  the  number  of  semesters  of  progress  they  have  made. 
Apparently  pupils  who  have  been  in  school  only  one  or  two  semes- 
ters average  less  progress  than  do  pupils  in  general.  It  is  of  course 
inevitable  that  those  who  have  been  in  school  more  than  fifteen 
semesters  average  less  progress  as  there  is  no  possibility  of  increasing 
their  total  progress  beyond  fifteen  semesters,  while  the  total  time  in 
school  increases.  The  average  rates,  on  the  other  hand,  show  that 
there  is  a  very  definite  tendency  for  pupils  who  have  made  the 
greater  amounts  of  progress  to  have  done  so  more  rapidly.  This  is 
merely  another  way  of  saying  that  those  pupils  who  progress  rel- 
atively far  in  school  are  the  ones  who  are  failed  least  often.  The 
percents  of  pupils  fast  and  slow  show  an  increase  that  varies  directly 
with  the  number  of  semesters  of  progress  made;  that  is  to  say,  the 
farther  they  go  in  school  the  more  chance  they  have  of  getting  out 
of  the  beaten  track.   This  agrees  with  a  priori  expectation. 

Progress  indices  for  single  elementary  school  systems.  The 
four  indices  of  progress  for  pupils  in  elementary  schools  have  been 
calculated  for  each  school  system,  and  are  summarized  in  Tables  III 
and  IV.  The  former  is  for  those  systems  having  semi-annual  pro- 
motions and  the  latter  for  those  having  annual.  Even  a  casual 
Inspection  of  these  tables  reveals  considerable  variation  between  the 
difi"erent  systems.  The  extremes  of  average  progress  are  .79  and  .99. 
There  are  several  systems  in  which  no  pupils  have  made  fast 
progress  while  in  one  system  25  percent  have  done  so.  The  percent 
of  pupils  making  regular  progress  varies  from  40  to  91,  and  of  those 

TTiis  should  be  interpreted  as  meaning  towns  and  cities  exclusive  of  Chicago. 

[18] 


TABLE  III.  INDICES  OF  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  ELEMENTARY 
SCHOOLS  HAVING  SEMESTER  PROMOTIONS 


Percent 

City 

Average 
Progress 

Number 

Fast 

Regular 

Slow 

Class  I 

9 

.96 

17 

58 

25 

10 

.94 

10 

68 

22 

37 

.94 

6 

70 

24 

92* 

.96 

10 

66 

24 

All 

.95 

13 

63 

24 

Class  II 

12 

.92 

9 

58 

32 

13 

.95 

16 

57 

27 

39 

.89 

7 

46 

46 

46 

.84 

4 

52 

44 

84 

.86 

4 

55 

41 

All 

.89 

7 

54 

39 

Class  III 

1 

.90 

7 

62 

31 

22 

.93 

9 

62 

29 

25 

.91 

5 

65 

31 

33 

.84 

3 

51 

46 

42 

.95 

8 

69 

23 

44 

.93 

7 

70 

23 

49 

.81 

4 

40 

56 

54 

.98 

22 

60 

18 

65 

.91 

7 

61 

32 

79 

.90 

10 

48 

42 

All 

.90 

7 

58 

35 

Class  IV 

4 

.99 

25 

50 

25 

18 

.98 

11 

70 

19 

35 

.91 

4 

65 

31 

59 

.94 

1 

82 

17 

All 

.95 

10 

67 

23 

AH  Semester 

.91 

8 

58 

34 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

.89 

5 

65 

31 

*The   data   for  this  city   are   not   included   in   the   totals    as   they   were    received   too   late.     Also 
they  are   for  the  second   and   not   for  the  first  semester  of    1922-23. 

making  slow  progress  from  9  to  56.  It  should  be  noted  that  these 
differences  are  not  extreme  in  the  sense  that  there  are  no  other 
systems  for  which  the  corresponding  indices  are  approximately 
equal,  for  in  every  case  there  are  several  systems  whose  indices  differ 
only  slightly  from  the  ones  mentioned. 


[19] 


TABLE  IV.    INDICES  OF  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  ELEMENTARY 
SCHOOLS  HAVING  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS 


Percent 

City           Av 

erage 
Dgress 

Number          Pr 

Fast 

Regular 

Slow 

Class  II 

SI 

85 

1 

65 

34 

58 

87 

2 

68 

30 

60 

85 

2 

67 

31 

All 

86 

2 

66 

32 

Class  III 

S 

91 

2 

79 

19 

IS 

91 

1 

76 

23 

29 

91 

3 

78 

19 

31 

96 

1 

91 

9 

40 

85 

4 

64 

33 

41 

91 

5 

64 

31 

4S 

93  ' 

2 

83 

14 

47 

86 

1 

70 

30 

48 

94 

1 

84 

IS 

S2 

86 

7 

49 

44 

53 

84 

2 

65 

33 

62 

89 

4 

71 

24 

66 

80 

1 

60 

39 

67 

83 

1 

66 

33 

70 

92 

2 

77 

21 

71 

85 

1 

67 

32 

75 

92 

.2 

79 

20 

76 

96 

1 

85 

14 

82 

88 

1 

73 

26 

85 

86 

1 

71 

38 

All 

88 

2 

72 

27 

Class  IV 

2 

88 

0 

73 

27 

6 

93 

4 

76 

19 

7 

87 

2 

69 

29 

8 

91 

2 

73 

25 

11 

91 

3 

75 

22 

14 

.90 

9 

65 

26 

17 

89 

1 

71 

28 

19 

87 

2 

66 

32 

20 

85 

0 

62 

38 

21 

79 

1 

55 

44 

23 

91 

4 

75 

21 

24 

84 

.4 

65 

34 

26 

83 

2 

57 

40 

27 

.83 

0 

65 

35 

28 

.92 

0 

73 

27 

30 

95 

1 

85 

13 

34 

.91 

1 

76 

23 

38 

.84 

2 

65 

33 

43 

86 

1 

68 

31 

SO 

.96 

5 

80 

15 

55 

90 

2 

79 

19 

56 

93 

6 

72 

22 

57 

89 

.4 

81 

18 

61 

90 

2 

73 

25 

63 

87 

1 

69 

29 

64 

85 

1 

64 

35 

68 

.93 

S 

78 

19 

69 

.89 

1 

73 

26 

72 

W 

0 

80 

20 

73 

88 

1 

71 

28 

74 

.84 

? 

58 

39 

77 

.90 

1 

75 

24 

80 

88 

1 

68 

31 

81 

82 

0 

65 

35 

83 

90 

1 

72 

27 

86 

.88 

1 

70 

29 

88 

86 

0 

63 

37 

All 

89 

2 

71 

27 

All  Annual 

88 

2 

70 

28 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

89 

5 

65 

31 

Rural 

1 

95 

4 

80 

16 

2 

88 

3 

68 

29 

3 

90 

5 

71 

24 

4 

89 

10 

63 

27 

All 

91 

4 

72 

24 

The  difference  between  an  average  progress  of  .79  and  one  of 
.99  may  not  seem  significant.  However,  if  these  indices  are  trans- 
'lated  into  the  number  of  years  required  for  an  average  pupil  to 
complete  the  elementary  school  their  meaning  becomes  more  ap- 
parent. A  pupil  whose  average  progress  is  .79  would  not  complete 
the  eighth  grade  until  after  the  end  of  his  tenth  year  in  school; 
while  one  advancing  at  the  average  rate  of  .99  would  need  only 
three  or  four  weeks  more  than  eight  years.  Thus  corresponding  to 
these  average  rates  of  progress  there  is  a  difference  of  nearly  two 
years  in  the  time  required  for  the  average  pupil  to  complete  the 
elementary  school. 

The  extreme  differences  in  the  percents  of  pupils  making  fast 
and  slow  progress  are  equally  significant.  There  are  several  systems 
in  which  the  organization  appears  to  be  so  rigid  and  so  lacking  in 
provisions  for  superior  pupils  that  no  pupil  in  the  elementary  school 
has  been  allowed  to  gain  any  time.  There  are  many  other  cities  in 
which  not  more  than  one  pupil  in  one  hundred  has  gained.  On  the 
other  hand  there  is  one  system  in  which  less  than  one  pupil  out  of 
ten  has  lost  time,  whereas  in  another  more  than  one  out  of  two  has 
done  so.  In  one  system  only  two-fifths  of  the  pupils  and  in  another 
more  than  nine-tenths  have  made  regular  progress.  In  view  of  the 
emphasis  which  is  now  being  placed  upon  the  necessity  for  making 
provisions  for  the  individual  differences  of  pupils,  the  fact  that  such 
conditions  exist  is  particularly  significant.  The  writer  realizes  that 
the  indices  used  do  not  measure  the  amount  of  flexibility  and  pro- 
vision for  individual  differences  with  perfect  accuracy,  but  he  can 
not  believe  that  such  large  variations  are  justified.  It  seems  evident 
that  many  systems  are  entirely  too  rigid  in  their  organization,  that 
a  immber  are  failing  entirely  too  large  a  percent  of  their  pupils,  and 
that  a  few  are  probably  allowing  too  many  to  gain  time. 

Influence  of  size  of  system  and  frequency  of  promotion  upon 
indices  of  progress  in  elementary  schools.  A  comparison  of  the 
totals  in  Tables  III  and  IV  for  the  separate  groups  reveals  that  the 
type  of  organization  does  influence  the  indices  of  progress.  Although 
the  figures  for  the  schools  having  semester  promotions  and  for  those 
having  annual  promotions  are  not  strictly  comparable,  it  appears 
that  in  general  pupils  make  somewhat  more  rapid  progress  in  sys- 
tems which  have  the  semester  plan  of  organization.  It  is  shown  also 
that  the  percent  of  pupils  making  rapid  progress  and  the  percent 
making   slow  progress   are  greater  under  the  semester  plan.    This 

[21] 


fact  may  also  be  noted  in  Table  I.  Thus  it  is  clear  that  a  system 
having  semi-annual  promotions  is  more  flexible  than  one  having 
annual  promotions.  This  is  to  be  expected  because  when  a  failure  or 
extra  promotion  involves  the  work  of  only  one  semester  it  is  more 
likely  to  be  given  than  when  it  involves  the  work  of  an  entire 
year. 

The  size  of  the  city  appears  to  exert  a  minor  influence,  if  any, 
upon  the  progress  of  pupils.  Such  difi"erences  as  exist  exhibit  no 
consistent  tendency  and  appear  to  result  from  chance  or  some  other 
factor.  However,  the  small  number  of  Class  I  cities  from  which 
returns  were  secured  limits  the  significance  of  any  comparisons  which 
may  be  made. 

The  basis  of  calculating  indices  of  progress  for  high  schools. 
Since  progress  in  the  high  school  is  in  terms  of  units  rather  than  of 
either  years  or  semesters,  it  was  necessary  to  use  a  definite  scheme, 
as  given  below,  for  translating  units  of  credit  into  units  of  progress. 


Semester 

Systems 

Annual  Systems 

Grade 

N 

umber  of  Semester 
Units 

Grade 

Number  of  Semester 
Units 

IXB 

0-1 

IX 

0-5 

IXA 

2-5 

X 

6-13 

XB 

6-9 

XI 

14-21 

•   XA 

10-13 

XII 

22-29 

XIB 

14-17 

XIA 

18-21 

XIIB 

22-25 

XIIA 

26-29 

This  plan  was  adopted  because,  in  the  first  place,  it  seemed  to  repre- 
sent the  consensus  of  opinion  and  practice,  in  so  far  as  there  is  any, 
and,  in  the  second,  it  seems  logical  that  if  a  pupil  has  not 
lost  more  than  two  semester  units  or,  in  other  words,  one  year's 
work  in  a  subject,  he  may  be  able  to  make  up  his  loss  and  graduate 
with  his  class. 

General  indices  of  progress  for  high  schools  in  Illinois.  Tables 
II,  V  and  VI  present  data  relative  to  the  high  schools  included  in 
this  investigation,  and  are  probably  as  representative  of  the  state  as 
are  the  elementary  schools.  The  general  average  progress  is  .93, 
which  means  that  the  average  high-school  pupil,  if  remaining  until 
graduation,  would  require  about  four  and  one-third  years  to  com- 
plete the  course.    One  pupil  out  of  every  twenty  has  gained  time, 


[22] 


TABLE  V.    INDICES  OF  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  HIGH  SCHOOLS 
HAVING  SEMESTER  PROMOTIONS 


Percent 

City 

Average 

Number 

Progress 

Fast 

Regular 

Slow 

Class  A 

9 

.94 

2 

83 

15 

38 

1.04 

20 

70 

10 

78 

.98 

17 

66 

17 

All 

.99 

14 

72 

14 

Class  B 

5 

.96 

4 

88 

8 

25 

.93 

5 

79 

15 

51 

.98 

3 

91 

6 

65 

.92 

3 

81 

16 

84 

.86 

2 

69 

29 

All 

.92 

3 

81 

16 

Class  C 

4 

.73 

0 

65 

35 

18 

.98 

9 

80 

11 

32 

.99 

21 

82 

17 

59 

.92 

1 

86 

13 

86 

.99 

11 

79 

9 

All 

.95 

8 

80 

11 

All  Semester 

.96 

9 

76 

15 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

.93 

5 

82 

U 

one  out  of  every  eight  has  lost,  and  sHghtly  more  than  four  out  of 
every  five  have  progressed  at  the  regular  rate. 

Progress  indices  for  single  high  schools.  The  indices  given  in 
Tables  V  and  VI  show  an  even  greater  variability  than  those  for 
elementary  schools.  In  certain  high  schools  the  average  progress  is 
only  .73  or  .74,  in  others  it  is  1.00,  and  in  one  it  is  1.04.  The  average 
time  required  to  complete  a  four-year  high-school  course  corres- 
ponding to  the  average  rates  of  progress  varies  from  a  few  weeks 
less  than  four  years  to  five  and  one-half  years.  A  large  number  of 
high  schools  having  annual  promotions  and  one  having  semester 
promotions  show  no  pupils  who  have  made  fast  progress.  In  two 
or  three  high  schools  no  pupils  have  made  either  fast  or  slow 
progress;  on  the  other  hand,  in  one  high  school  20  percent  of  the 
pupils  have  made  fast,  and  in  another  35  percent  have  made  slow 
progress.    It  is  not  particularly  surprising  that  in  many  high  schools 

[23] 


TABLE  VI.  INDICES  OF  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  HIGH  SCHOOLS 
HAVING  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS 


Percent 

City 

Average 

Number 

Progress 

Fast 

Regular 

Slow 

Class  B 

13 

.93 

1 

90 

9 

36 

.87 

2 

86 

13 

53 

.94 

0 

95 

5 

All 

.92 

1 

90 

9 

Class  C 

2 

.94 

0 

95 

5 

6 

.96 

1 

91 

8 

8 

.96 

0 

96 

4 

15 

.79 

1 

78 

21 

16 

.95 

0 

93 

7 

20 

.91 

0 

89 

11 

23 

.97 

1 

95 

4 

34 

.74 

0 

73 

27 

41 

.93 

.5 

91 

9 

43 

.93 

0 

91 

9 

47 

.84 

0 

82 

18 

52 

.91 

0 

90 

10 

68 

.98 

1 

97 

2 

70 

.80 

0 

75 

25 

74 

.87 

0 

84 

16 

76 

.89 

0 

87 

13 

77 

.91 

0 

89 

11 

79 

.87 

1 

87 

12 

82 

.95 

0 

93 

7 

All 

.89 

.2 

87 

13 

Class  D 

3 

.96 

0 

98 

2 

21 

1.00 

2 

96 

2 

27 

.85 

0 

83 

17 

28 

1.00 

0 

100 

0 

50 

.99 

0 

99 

1 

55 

.96 

3 

89 

8 

61 

.86 

0 

84 

16 

64 

.95 

0 

94 

6 

83 

.95 

0 

94 

6 

90 

.98 

2 

94 

4 

91 

.82 

2 

78 

20 

All 

.94 

1 

92 

7 

Class  E 

38 

.83 

0 

86 

14 

69 

.97 

0 

97 

3 

87* 

0 

100 

0 

88 

'.87 

0 

96 

4 

89 

.91 

0 

92 

8 

All 

.90 

0 

93 

7 

All  Annual 

.90 

.4 

89 

11 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

.93 

5 

82 

13 

*Only   9th   grade   pupils   are   Included. 


TABLE  VII.  INDICES  OF  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  SINGLE 
UNIT  SYSTEMS 


Percent 

City 

Average 
Progress 

Number 

Fast 

Regular 

Slow 

2 

.93 

0 

77 

23 

9 

.97 

17 

58 

25 

13 

.99 

21 

55 

54 

15 

.92 

1 

74 

25 

18 

.97 

11 

70 

20 

21 

.85 

1 

59 

40 

28 

.93 

0 

76 

24 

39 

.94 

12 

50 

38 

55 

.93 

3 

77 

20 

59 

.96 

1 

83 

17 

65 

.93 

8 

62 

30 

69 

.92 

4 

73 

24 

76 

.95 

2 

80 

18 

77 

.94 

4 

72 

24 

86 

.92 

5 

68 

28 

All 

.94 

11 

62 

27 

having  annual  promotions  no  pupils  have  gained  a  whole  year.  How- 
ever, the  question  may  be  raised  whether  this  is  a  satisfactory  con- 
dition when  the  need  for  making  adequate  provisions  for  individual 
differences  is  considered.  The  discussion  given  in  connection  with 
the  corresponding  elementary-school  data  may  also  be  applied  here. 
Influence  of  size  of  high  school  and  frequency  of  promotion 
upon  indices  of  progress.  The  differences  between  the  indices  for 
the  different  classes  of  high  schools  are  more  marked  than  for  the 
elementary  schools.  This  is  especially  true  In  the  case  of  the  first 
three  classes  of  high  schools  having  semester  promotions:  the  aver- 
age progress  for  pupils  in  Class  A  schools  is  .99,  for  those  in  Class 
B,  .92  and  for  those  in  Class  C,  .95.  There  are  corresponding  varia- 
tions in  the  other  indices  of  progress.  The  average  indices  for  the 
different  classes  of  high  schools  having  annual  promotions  show 
somewhat  smaller  differences.  It  does  not,  however,  appear  that 
either  the  type  of  organization  or  the  size  of  school  is  a  material 
factor  in  determining  the  average  progress  of  pupils  through  the 
school.  The  flexibility  of  organization,  as  indicated  by  the  percents 
of  pupils  making  fast  and  slow  progress,  is  greater  in  schools  having 
semester  promotions. 

[25] 


TABLE  Vni.   INDICES  OF  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  WHOLE 
SYSTEMS  NOT  COTERMINOUS 


Percent 

City                            Av 

'erage 
ogress 

Number                         Pr 

Fast 

Regular 

Slow 

4 

97 

21 

52 

26  . 

6 

94 

4 

77 

19 

20 

89 

0 

64 

35 

23 

92 

4 

76 

21 

27 

86 

8 

62 

30 

34 

92 

1 

73 

26 

38 

86 

2 

66 

32 

41 

92 

5 

66 

29 

43 

89 

2 

69 

29 

47 

90 

2 

69 

29 

50 

98 

4 

87 

10 

51 

89 

1 

65 

33 

53 

88 

3 

68 

29 

61 

91 

3 

71 

26 

64 

92 

2 

63 

35 

68 

95 

5 

78 

18 

74 

87 

3 

.   60 

37 

83 

92 

3 

72 

25 

88 

87 

0 

65 

35 

All 

90 

3 

68 

29 

All  Entire  Systems 

92 

7 

65 

28 

The  indices  of  progress  of  pupils  in  systems  from  which  both 
elementary  and  high-school  data  were  obtained.  Table  VII  gives 
the  indices  of  progress  of  pupils  in  single-unit  systems  and  Table 
VIII  of  those  in  whole  systems  not  coterminous.  The  average  pro- 
gress for  the  former  is  .94,  for  the  latter  .90.  Correspondingly,  the 
percent  fast  for  the  former  is  considerably  greater  than  that  for  the 
latter  and  the  percent  slow  somewhat  smaller.  In  other  words,  it 
appears  that  in  unified  systems  pupils  make  better  progress  than  in 
those  not  so  organized.  The  general  average  progress  for  both  is  .92. 
If  these  data  are  representative  of  the  whole  state,  the  average 
Illinois  pupil  in  a  system  having  both  elementary  and  high  schools 
requires  slightly  over  thirteen  years  to  complete  the  course. 

The  variability  of  the  indices  given  in  these  two  tables  is  con- 
siderably less  than  that  for  either  the  elementary  or  high-school 
indices  separately.  Two  causes  at  least  for  this  fact  may  be  given; 
(1)    several  of  the   systems   which   have   extremely  large   or   small 


[26] 


< 

U 

re 

o 

\0  •*  -f  vO"-> 
On  C>  C^  0^  On 

tS  en  ON  ■<*<  N£l  On 

On  On  cc  OO  On  OO 

On  on 

On 

6 

> 

O  oo  \o  OO  \0 
0^  oo  0^  ^  OS 

r^   ■  so  SO  ''^  so 
On   •  On  On  On  On 

u^  CO 

OnO 

00 
On 

5 

> 

\C  ■*  \0  >J^  SO 

0>  CK  Cn  (^  0\ 

<J-)  On  -^  -^  —  "^ 

ON  O  On  On  On  On 

so  SO 
ON  O. 

SO 

ON 

< 
> 

oo  ro  •*  oc  SO 
OMTv  O  Os  C^ 

ro  r^  tN  oc  fS  >-< 

ON  C  On  00  ON  ON 

^  CO 
ON  On 

^. 

ca 

r^  oc  r^  oo  r^ 

O  CN  ON  C^  O 

U-)  OO  —  OO  O  OJ 

O.  On  On  OO  ON  On 

-*  CO 

On  ON 

On 

< 
> 

O  O  't'  'f  ^ 

O  00  On  On  C^ 

—  O  OO  00  m  On 
On  OO  CO  OO  OO  00 

cor- 

ON  On 

CO 

On 

a 

> 

r^  —  O  — «  wri 

On  0\  OnO  ON 

ro  OO  ON  ro  r~-  On 
On  On  OO  00  OO  OO 

On  O. 

CO 

On 

< 

> 

r^  --   •  SO  oo 

ON  O   -ON  ON 

CN  Tf  OO  o)  i'^  r-- 

On  On  OO  OO  OO  OO 

C  O 

ONO 

ON 

> 

r~-  cs  •  so  "-o 

On  On   •  On  On 

■^  SO  SO  r^  CO  On 
ON  On  OO  OO  C»  OO 

OON 

ON,  On 

ON 

< 
> 

"^  On  so  so  so 
On  0\  On  On  On 

CO  "J^  O  CO  f^  On 

O  —  On  oc  00  oc 

OO  oc 

OO  On 

CO 

On 

a 
> 

■*  >J"i  I^  On  O 
On  oc  On.  Os  On 

OO  —  O  '^  CO  so 
oc  On  oc  OO  oc  OO 

OO  Tf 

00  On 

CO 
OO 

<; 

oo  -H  o  ro  oo 

On  ^^  On  On  On 

OO   •  lO  OO  f^  -^ 
OO  ■  OO  r-^  OO  oc 

OC  On 

o 

On 

n 

oc  n  so  o  r^ 

ON  On  ON  O  On 

ON  oc  On,  <N  CN  so 

00  CO  oc  cc  00  oc 

oc  On 

O 
On 

< 

r^  cN  On  ror^ 

On  On  On  On  On 

—  o  •  >j-i  fs  CI 

O  OO   ■  r —  oc  OO 

sOfN 

r-ON 

OO 

r- 

a 

so  r)  CO  •*  ON 
OC  ON  On  oc  oo 

C^  uo   •  so  C^  ON 
oc  r--  ■  r-  r-r^ 

oo  •* 
r^  00 

OO 

< 

r^  vr,  r^  CO  u") 

t^  r^  so  ON  r^ 

r^  OO   .  Tj.  ir^  »-, 

^c  'tN  .lo  so  so 

On  On 

so 

( 

E 
J 

Class  I 

9 

10 

37 

92 

All  Scm.  I 

Class  II 
12 
13 
39 
46 
84 
All  Sem.  II 

* 

£  £ 

ILI  «J 

<< 

V 

£ 

wo 

< 

o  a 

c 


1  = 


O  -r 


[27] 


TABLE  X.   THE  AVERAGE  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  ELEMENTARY 
SCHOOLS  HAVING  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS,  BY  GRADES 


Grade 

All 

City  Number 

Grades 

II 

III 

IV 

V 

VI 

VII 

VIII 

Class  II 

51 

.67 

.77 

.85 

.88 

.91 

.89 

.94 

.85 

58 

.73 

.83 

.87 

.85 

.92 

.91 

.95 

.87 

60 

.62 

.81 

.84 

.87 

.89 

.93 

.94 

.85 

All  Annual  II 

.68 

.79 

.86 

.87 

.91 

.91 

.94 

.86 

All  Annual  III 

.74 

.83 

.87 

.88 

.91 

.92 

.94 

.88 

All  Annual  IV 

.77 

.84 

.86 

.89 

.90 

.92 

.94 

.89 

All  Annual 

.73 

.82 

.86 

.88 

.91 

.92 

.94 

.88 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

.77 

.87 

.89 

.92 

.92 

.93 

.96 

.89 

indices  are  represented  in  this  study  only  by  their  elementary  or 
their  high  schools,  not  by  both;  (2)  the  coefficient  of  correlation  be- 
tween the  average  progress  in  the  elementary  and  in  the  high  schools 
of  the  same  city  is  practically  zero.  This  second  statement  may 
be  interpreted  to  mean  that  there  do  not  appear  to  be  unified  pro- 
motion policies  in  the  elementary  and  high  schools  of  the  same 
communities,  regardless  of  whether  they  are  single  unit  systems 
or  not. 

Average  progress  of  pupils  by  grades.  In  the  preceding  tables 
average  progress  has  referred  to  the  average  progress  made  in  all 
grades  combined.  In  Tables  IX  and  X,  the  average  progress  of 
pupils  in  the  various  grades  of  the  elementary  schools  in  cities  of 
Classes  I  and  II  is  presented.  In  general,  the  average  progress  in- 
creases from  the  lower  to  the  higher  grades,  although  there  are 
a  number  of  exceptions,  some  of  which  are  rather  marked.  The 
most  noticeable  of  these  is  in  the  case  of  city  No.  92,  in  which  the 
average  progress,  except  in  II  B  and  VI  B,  is  very  nearly  the  same 
throughout  the  different  grades.  This  increase  in  the  average  rate 
of  progress  from  the  lower  to  the  higher  grades  is  in  accord  with 
common  experience.  The  number  of  pupils  failing  is  greatest  in  the 
first   grade    and    least   in   the   upper   grades.    The   relatively   small 


[28] 


TABLE  XI.  THE  AVERAGE  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  HIGH  SCHOOLS 
HAVING  SEMESTER  PROMOTIONS,  BY  GRADES 


Grade 

All 

City  Number 

Grades 

IXA 

XB 

XA 

XIB 

XIA 

XIIB 

XIIA 

Class  A 

9 

.83 

.95 

.90 

.95 

.98 

.99 

.96 

.94 

39 

.87 

.98 

1.04 

1.04 

1.08 

1.04 

1.14 

1.04 

78 

.65 

.92 

1.01 

.92 

1.12 

.99 

1.09 

.98 

All  Sem.  A 

.77 

.95 

.98 

.96 

1.07 

1.00 

1.06 

.99 

Class  B 

5 

.56 

.97 

.75 

1.00 

1.02 

.94 

1.17 

.96 

25 

.78 

.96 

.80 

.89 

.90 

1.00 

1.13 

.93 

51 

.71 

1.00 

.72 

.98 

1.05 

1.00 

1.17 

.98 

65 

.82 

.90 

.84 

.93 

.92 

1.01 

1.03 

.92 

84 

.73 

.87 

.79 

.83 

.91 

.94 

.93 

.86 

All  Sem.  B 

.75 

.94 

.80 

.92 

.97 

.97 

1.03 

.92 

All  Sem.  C 

.53 

.90 

.97 

.95 

1.06 

1.00 

1.09 

.95 

All  Semester 

.74 

.93 

.92 

.94 

1.04 

.99 

1.06 

.96 

number  of  failures  in  the  upper  grades  is  due  in  part  to  the  fact  that 
many  children  leave  school  before  completing  the  work  of  these 
grades. 

Tables,  XI  and  XII  present  similar  data  for  high  schools,  and 
show  something  of  the  same  tendency,  although  the  average  progress 
is  more  irregular  than  that  in  elementary  schools.  The  same  ex- 
planations may  be  advanced  here  as  given  in  the  preceding  dis- 
cussion. 

Relative  value  of  the  indices  of  progress.  Of  the  four  indices 
of  progress  which  were  calculated,  the  "average  progress"  is  most 
significant  of  the  general  status  of  a  school  system.  The  other  three 
indices — "percent  of  pupils  making  fast  progress,"  "percent  of  pupils 
making  regular  progress"  and  "percent  of  pupils  making  slow 
progress"  are  useful  for  indicating  something  of  the  provisions 
which  are  being  made  for  the  individual  differences  of  the  pupils. 
For  example,  the  average  progress  is  the  same  in  a  system  in  which 
5  percent  of  the  pupils  have  made  fast,  90  percent  regular,  and  5 
percent  slow  progress  as  in  one  in  which  the  percents  are,  respect- 


[29] 


TABLE  XII.  THE  AVERAGE  PROGRESS  OF  PUPILS  IN  HIGH  SCHOOLS 
HAVING  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS,  BY  GRADES 


Grade 

All 

City  Number 

Grades 

X 

XI 

XII 

Class  B 

13 

.89 

.97 

.91 

.93 

36 

.81 

.97 

1.04 

.87 

53 

.89 

.97 

.98 

.94 

All  Annual  B 

.86 

.97 

1.00 

.92 

All  Annual  C 

.83 

.94 

.98 

.89 

All  Annual  D 

.89 

.99 

1.00 

.94 

All  Annual  E 

.90 

.98 

.90 

All  Annual 

.85 

.96 

.99 

.90 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

.96 

.97 

1.00 

.93 

Ively,  20,  60  and  20.  The  figures  for  the  second  system  are  evidence 
that  it  is  giving  more  attention  to  adapting  the  rate  of  progress  to 
the  individual  differences  of  the  children.  However,  the  fact  that  its 
percents  of  pupils  making  fast  and  slow  progress  are  small  does  not 
prove  that  a  system  has  a  non-flexible  plan  of  organization  and  pays 
no  attention  to  providing  for  individual  differences. 


[30] 


CHAPTER   III 
AGE-GRADE  INDICES 

Age-grade  indices  used  in  this  report.  As  a  basis  for  defining 
and  calculating  age-grade  indices,  it  is  necessary  to  establish  a 
"standard  age"  for  each  grade.  There  are  several  definitions  of 
standard  age  which  are  in  general  use.  In  this  investigation  the  age 
of  six  was  taken  as  the  normal  age  for  entering  the  first  grade  of 
the  elementary  school.  Thus  for  systems  having  semester  promo- 
tions, six  up  to  but  not  including  six  and  one-half  was  taken  as  the 
normal  age  of  entrance  to  Grade  I  B;  six  and  one-half  up  to  but  not 
including  seven  as  the  normal  age  for  entering  I  A;  etc.  For  systems 
having  annual  promotions,  six  up  to  but  not  including  seven  was 
considered  the  normal  age  for  entering  Grade  I;  seven  up  to  but 
not  including  eight  as  the  normal  age  for  entering  Grade  II,  etc. 

The  following  age-grade  indices  are  used:  (1)  "Average  over- 
ageness,"  (2)  "Percent  of  pupils  under-age  or  accelerated,"  (3) 
"Percent  of  pupils  at-age  or  making  normal  progress,"  (4)  "Percent 
of  pupils  over-age  or  retarded." 

Method  of  calctdating  age-grade  indices.  As  a  means  of  calcu- 
lating these  indices,  the  facts  relating  to  chronological  age  and  grade 
location  were  summarized  in  an  age-grade  table,  similar  to  the 
"progress  and  years  in  school"  table  used  in  calculating  the  indices 
of  progress.  The  differences  are  that  grade  location  is  used  instead 
of  years  (semesters)  of  progress  and  chronological  age  instead  of 
years  (semesters)  in  school.  Table  XIII  summarizes  the  age-grade 
facts  for  all  city  schools  including  both  elementary  and  high  schools 
and  corresponds  in  part  to  Tables  I  and  II.  It  is  to  be  read  as 
follows:  In  Grade  I,  there  are  78  pupils  four  years  of  age,^  that  is, 
whose  ages  are  as  much  as  four  years  but  not  as  much  as  five  years, 
1731  pupils  five  years  of  age,  4525,  six  years  of  age,  etc.  The  median 
age  is  6.49  years.  Twenty-five  percent  of  them  are  younger  than  the 
standard  adopted,  49  percent  are  at-age  and  26  percent  over-age. 

According  to  our  definition  of  standard  age  for  grade  those 
pupils  in  Grade  I  whose  ages  are  less  than  six  years  are  under-age 


^All  ages  are  computed  as  of  September  1,  1922. 

[31] 


< 

g 

1-1 

< 
H 

U 
G 

< 

o 

ui 
o 

< 


o< 

vOK^Mi^OOON-^f^O^OO 

i/-.'^— •-<0^00-*^^O^f^>0 

<vl 

Av- 
erage 
Over- 
agc- 
nesB 

5 

1 

c 
'-5  Sj 

sO^*•ooc^.O^-^^^p^Tfu^^o^«' 

f2 

o 

t- 

8 

(S* 

8 

?J 

(N 

o 

^ 

t^ 

8 

o 

rs       r^       -*       r^       *- 

\D 

d 

C\ 

-^         -H                                                                O         f^         ty-,         00 
,-■         —         fN         LO 

O 

o 

00 

(St                       ^                       ^          sO         •^^         ^'         —         OO 
(s|        \0       <*^       "^ 

•^ 

o 

t^ 

—        t-->rr.f^GO'»f<^QOaN 

-^      r-»      O      OS      to      fn 
^      ^      P^      Ln 

d 

\a 

1—"                   t*-)r^sCrsir^-^j-— ^o^sO 
♦-1       fn       u-j       so       f^ 

O 

d 

wn 

—       m      U-)      t^       On       -^ 

to 

OS 
00 

2 

csu-)i^0^oooo-^r^ 

-N         '•J^         00         (M         (s)         U-i 

i 

8 

od 

r^ 

-^        -^       00       (^       o        \o 

S 

•9" 

::j 

«       r^       00       'f       r^        ON       — 

NO 

s 

.0-^r^oor^-^(--)Qoo 

•-HU-iu-iiy^Or^t^O 
04        tN.        O        (^        On        --^ 

u-1 

O 
1^ 

o 

r*^        ^       -^       rs)       i^       00       r^ 
-^       \0       w-1       ^       On 

S 

!> 

-^      r^      O      ^      xj~i      t^      ij-i 

00        O        ^        ^        Q        00 
'^       ^       On       O 

i 

CO 

O        -t-        O        -^        (SI        r^. 
•—       ui       O        OO       On 

ON 

oo 

I^ 

^        OO        -^        'T        On 
—        i-r>        r^        On 

r^      '^      (SI 

s 

o 

-o 

u-i      00      r^      -^ 

fs)         IS.         -^ 

IS. 

ON 

tQ 

^ 

«        00        -^ 

O 

■* 

rS 

rs. 

8 

6 

Si 
2-S 

l<3 

or  accelerated.  There  are  78 -f- 1731  or  1809  such  pupils.  Those 
who  are  six  years  old  are  at-age,  and  those  whose  ages  are  greater 
'than  six,  that  is  seven  or  more,  are  over-age  or  retarded.  In  com- 
puting the  average  over-ageness  for  a  given  grade,  the  average  age 
of  all  pupils  in  this  grade  is  first  obtained.  The  difference  between 
this  average  age  and  the  standard  age  for  the  grade  gives  the 
average  over-ageness,  which  is  expressed  in  terms  of  years.  For 
example,  an  average  over-ageness  of  .39  means  that  the  average  age 
of  the  pupils  of  a  given  grade  is  .39  of  a  year  greater  than  the 
standard  age  for  that  grade.  In  making  this  computation  the  mid- 
point of  the  age  interval  for  a  grade  is  taken  as  the  standard  age. 
Thus  in  systems  having  semi-annual  promotions  the  standard  age 
for  Grade  I  B  is  6.25  years;  in  systems  having  annual  promotions 
the  standard  average  age  for  the  first  grade  is  6.50  years.  The  over- 
ageness  for  a  school  system  or  group  of  school  systems  is  the 
weighted  average  of  the  over-ageness  for  the  various  grades. 

On  the  lowest  line  of  the  table  the  average  grade  is  given 
for  each  age-group.  It  is  one  more  than  the  average  number  of 
years  of  progress.  For  example,  the  nine-year  old  pupils  have  an 
average  grade  of  3.75.  This  means  that  on  the  average  these  pupils 
are  three-fourths  of  the  way  through  the  third  grade  or  have  made 
2.75  years  of  progress.  It  will  be  noted  that  up  to  and  including  the 
eighteen-year  old  group  the  pupils  in  each  age-group  have  a  higher 
average  grade  than  those  in  any  lower  age-group. 

General  age-grade  indices  for  Illinois  schools.  For  all  of  the 
town  and  city  elementary  schools  included  in  this  study  the  average 
over-ageness  is  .45  year,  for  all  rural  elementary  schools  .15  year  and 
for  all  high  schools  .33  year.  For  all  city  schools,  that  is,  elementary 
and  high  schools  combined,  the  average  over-ageness  is  .43  year. 
Their  percent  of  pupils  under-age  is  23,  of  those  at-age,  36  and  of 
those  over-age,  42.  For  rural  schools  the  percents  are  29,  42  and 
29  respectively.  The  median  age  of  entrance  is  about  six  and  one- 
third  years  in  city  schools,  and  a  tenth  of  a  year  less  in  rural 
schools.  The  quartile  deviation  in  each  case  is  slightly  over  one- 
half  year.  Entrants  to  high  school  average  almost  fourteen  and  one- 
half  years  of  age  with  a  quartile  deviation  of  two-thirds  of  a  year. 

Age-grade  indices  for  elementary  schools.  In  Tables  XIV  and 
XV  the  age-grade  indices  are  given  for  the  elementary  schools 
which  cooperated  in  this   investigation.    The   schools    are   grouped 

[33] 


TABLE  XIV.    AGE-GRADE  INDICES  FOR  ELEMENTARY  SCHCX)LS 
HAVING  SEMESTER  PROMOTIONS 


Percent 

Age  at  Entrance 

Average 
Over- 

City  Number 

ageness 

Under 

At 

Over 

Quartile 

Age 

Age 

Age 

Median 

Deviation 

Class  I 

9 

.42 

26 

29 

46 

6.16 

,32 

10 

.40 

24 

26 

45 

6.41 

.55 

37 

.39 

21 

32 

46 

6.31 

.41 

92 

.16 

32 

31 

37 

6.19 

.36 

All 

.41 

24 

30 

46 

6.25 

.41 

Class  II 

12 

.48 

22 

30 

48 

6.22 

.40 

13 

.39 

26 

25 

49 

6.32 

.42 

39 

.48 

23 

19 

48 

6.06 

.39 

46 

.77 

17 

25 

58 

6.16 

.44 

84 

.62 

23 

27 

50 

6.05 

.38 

All 

.58 

21 

28 

51 

6.23 

.41 

Class  III 

1 

.48 

25 

27 

48 

6.27 

.37 

22 

.51 

23 

27 

50 

6.17 

.40 

25 

.26 

33 

27 

40 

6.03 

.37 

33 

1.02 

13 

25 

62 

6.25 

.44 

42 

.38 

20 

38 

42 

6.16 

.32 

44 

.26 

31 

28 

41 

6.16 

.38 

49 

1.01 

9 

22 

68 

6.27 

.15 

54 

.09 

38 

30 

32 

6.18 

.22, 

65 

.47 

29 

24 

48 

6.09 

Al 

19 

.55 

22 

26 

51 

6.13 

.50 

All 

.54 

24 

27 

49 

6.17 

.40 

Class  IV 

4 

.16 

42 

20 

38 

6.08 

.39 

18 

.14 

40 

29 

32 

6.11 

.2,2 

35 

.88 

12 

25 

63 

6.38 

.51 

59 

.38 

24 

34 

42 

6.24 

.32 

All 

.43 

28 

27 

45 

6.19 

.40 

All  Semester 

.S2> 

23 

27 

50 

6.18 

.41 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

AS 

22 

36 

42 

6.31 

.53 

as  in  the  corresponding  tables  of  Chapter  II.  In  addition  to  the 
four  age-grade  indices,  these  tables  include  the  median  age  at 
entrance  and  the  quartile  deviation  from  this  median  age.  The 
quartile  deviation  means  that  approximately  one-half  of  the  pupils 
are  included  within  a  range  of  that  distance  on  either  side  of  the 


[34] 


TABLE  XV.    AGE-GRADE  INDICES  FOR  ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS 
HAVING  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS 


Percent 

Age  at  Entrance 

City 
Number 

Average 

Over- 

ageness 

Under-Age 

At-Age 

Over-Age 

Median 

Quartile 
Deviation 

Class  II 

51 

.62 

17 

37 

46 

6.44 

.54 

58 

.30 

22 

44 

34 

6.27 

.52 

60 

.55 

17 

39 

44 

6.33 

.52 

All 

.49 

19 

40 

41 

6.36 

.53 

Class  III 

5 

.34 

30 

36 

34 

6.06 

.57 

15 

.22 

27 

43 

30 

6.22 

.70 

29 

.29 

19 

49 

31 

6.47 

.41 

31 

.06 

26 

50 

24 

6.43 

.42 

40 

.53 

17 

41 

41 

6.41 

.37 

41 

.23 

20 

S3 

27 

6.30 

.54 

45 

.01 

25 

56 

19 

6.34 

.40 

47 

.57 

15 

45 

40 

6.39 

.42 

48 

.10 

26 

48 

27 

6.32 

.52 

52 

.15 

27 

41 

32 

6.05 

.53 

53 

.49 

19 

42 

40 

6.36 

.44 

62 

.42 

19 

43 

39 

6.48 

.59 

66 

1.04 

8 

30 

62 

6.67 

.43 

67 

.50 

22 

38 

40 

6.30 

.57 

70 

.26 

20 

50 

30 

6.39 

.43 

71 

.59 

22 

37 

42 

6.31 

.61 

75 

.16 

22 

53 

25 

6.34 

.43 

76 

.03 

24 

56 

19 

6.31 

.43 

82 

.25 

20 

48 

32 

6.40 

.41 

85 

.42 

21 

40 

39 

6.31 

.45 

All 

.40 

21 

43 

36 

6.36 

.50 

Class  IV 

2 

.42 

IS 

48 

37 

6.37 

.43 

6 

.30 

24 

43 

33 

6.41 

.45 

7 

.58 

12 

48 

40 

6.47 

.38 

8 

.21 

22 

50 

29 

6.33 

.50 

11 

.34 

16 

51 

32 

6.36 

.52 

14 

.35 

32 

34 

34 

6.13 

.30 

17 

.36 

23 

39 

37 

6.31 

.54 

19 

.26 

20 

48 

32 

6.27 

.52 

20 

.70 

15 

38 

47 

6.41 

.54 

21 

.61 

14 

48 

39 

6.29 

.44 

23 

.32 

24 

42 

34 

6.43 

.46 

24 

.54 

16 

43 

41 

6.38 

.43 

26 

.51 

18 

43 

39 

6.30 

.53 

27 

.27 

25 

43 

32 

6.23 

.51 

28 

.45 

16 

46 

38 

6.44 

.43 

30 

—  .03 

28 

52 

20 

6.20 

.53 

34 

.08 

26 

54 

21 

6.22 

.50 

38 

.38 

18 

43 

38 

6.24 

.57 

43 

.26 

25 

43 

32 

6.29 

.53 

50 

.05 

25 

53 

22 

6.27 

.48 

55 

.17 

20 

52 

28 

6.35 

.46 

56 

.17 

29 

41 

30 

6.34 

.47 

57 

.14 

24 

49 

27 

6.35 

.41 

61 

.31 

25 

41 

35 

6.34 

.51 

63 

.29 

15 

56 

29 

6.37 

.38 

64 

.41 

17 

46 

37 

6.30 

.54 

68 

.24 

18 

55 

17 

6.40 

.39 

69 

.38 

18 

46 

36 

6.38 

.41 

72 

.12 

28 

47 

25 

6.22 

.53 

73 

.36 

19 

44 

38 

6.35 

.45 

74 

.18 

25 

48 

27 

6.14 

.52 

77 

.27 

25 

41 

34 

6.34 

.51 

80 

.33 

17 

54 

29 

6.34 

.51 

81 

.48 

19 

44 

37 

6.31 

.47 

83 

.26 

IS 

59 

26 

6.42 

.37 

86 

.35 

21 

44 

35 

6.28 

.51 

88 

.65 

12 

40 

48 

6.43 

.21 

All 

.32 

21 

46 

33 

6.32 

.49 

All  Annual 

.39 

21 

43 

36 

6.35 

.50 

All  Ann.  andSem. 

.45 

22 

36 

42 

6.31 

.53 

Rural 

1 

—  .09 

34 

47 

19 

6.15 

.55 

2 

.26 

26 

41 

33 

6.24 

.54 

3 

.20 

28 

40 

32 

6.26 

.58 

4 

.65 

28 

35 

37 

6.48 

.49 

All 

.15 

29 

42 

29 

6.23 

.56 

TABLE  XVI.   AGE-GRADE  INDICES  FOR  HIGH  SCHOOLS  HAVING 
SEMESTER  PROMOTIONS 


Age  at  Entrance 

Average 
Over- 

ageness 

Percent 

City 

Eleme 

ntary 

High  School 

Number 

Under 
Age 

At 
Age 

Over 

Age 

Median 

Quartile 
Deviation 

Median 

Quartile 
Deviation 

Class  A 

9 

.24 

33 

23 

44 

6.21 

.40 

14.33 

.63 

39 

.12 

37 

24 

39 

6.22 

.45 

14.30 

.55 

78 

—.09 

4S 

22 

32 

14.14 

.53 

All 

.07 

40 

23 

38 

6^21 

Al 

14.24 

.56 

Qass  B 

S 

.77 

20 

19 

61 

14.78 

.81 

2S 

.31 

29 

22 

49 

5!9S 

'.n 

14.39 

.59 

51 

.62 

22 

16 

62 

6.64 

.57 

14.82 

.67 

65 

.30 

32 

20 

48 

6.15 

.39 

14.31 

.65 

84 

.27 

29 

25 

46 

14.28 

.61 

All 

.43 

27 

21 

52 

6^23 

'A7 

14.39 

.67 

Class  C 

4 

.46 

29 

15 

55 

6.23 

.51 

14.21 

.52 

18 

.63 

19 

28 

S3 

6.31 

.31 

14.52 

.49 

32 

.07 

35 

29 

36 

6.26 

.31 

14.22 

.49 

59 

.23 

24 

38 

38 

6.31 

.31 

14.34 

.38 

86 

.33 

33 

19 

48 

6.24 

.40 

14.46 

.62 

All 

.30 

29 

27 

44 

6.25 

.45 

14.35 

.50 

All  Semester 

.24 

34 

23 

44 

6.22 

.52 

14.33 

.59 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

.28 

30 

31 

39 

6.36 

.55 

14.45 

.67 

median.  Thus  a  quartile  deviation  of  .45  with  a  median  age  of  6.50 
means  that  approximately  one-half  of  the  pupils  entered  between 
the  ages  of  6.05  and  6.95. 

An  examination  of  these  tables  reveals  much  the  same  varia- 
tions as  were  noted  for  indices  of  progress  in  the  corresponding 
tables  of  Chapter  II.  In  the  elementary  schools  of  one  system  the 
average  over-ageness  is — .03,  The  interpretation  of  this  fact  is  that 
on  the  average  the  pupils  are  slightly  younger  than  the  standard 
age.  There  are  other  systems  in  which  the  average  over-ageness  is 
relatively  small.  At  the  other  extreme  we  find  systems  in  which  the 
average  over-ageness  exceeds  one  year.  The  percent  of  pupils  under- 
age or  accelerated  ranges  from  8  to  42  and  the  percent  of  those  over- 
age or  retarded  from  19  to  68.  The  lowest  median  age  of  entrance 
is  6.03  and  the  highest  6.48,  which  indicates  a  lack  of  uniformity 
with  reference  to  age  of  children  entering  school. 

Age-grade  indices  for  high  schools.  In  Tables  XVI  and  XVII 
the  age-grade  indices  are  given  for  the  high  schools  cooperating  in 
this  investigation.   In  addition  to  the  four  indices  of  over-ageness,  the 


[36] 


TABLE  XVII.  AGE-GRADE  INDICES  FOR  HIGH  SCHOOLS 
HAVING  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS 


Average 

Percent 

Age  of  Entrance 

Elementary 

High 

City 

School 

Number 

Over- 

ageness 

Under 

At 

Over 

Age 

Age 

Age 

Median 

Quartile 
Deviation 

Median 

Quartile 
Deviation 

Class  B 

13 

—  .53 

54 

30 

16 

6.23 

.32 

13.85 

.71 

36 

.61 

IS 

34 

51 

14.92 

.75 

S3 

.32 

23 

38 

39 

6.58 

;s9 

14.68 

.75 

All 

.14 

30 

34 

36 

6.42 

.47 

14.51 

.82 

Class  C 

2 

.24 

21 

42 

36 

6.45 

.56 

14.60 

.71 

6 

.16 

28 

38 

34 

6.12 

.54 

14.49 

.63 

8 

.34 

22 

37 

41 

14.79 

.77 

IS 

.14 

29 

31 

39 

6^29 

A9 

14.44 

.65 

16 

.31 

28 

33 

39 

6.16 

.62 

14.68 

.85 

20 

.46 

17 

44 

39 

6.40 

.57 

14.70 

.67 

23 

.25 

22 

47 

31 

6.33 

.47 

14.61 

.62 

34 

.49 

13 

47 

40 

6.45 

.45 

14.55 

.57 

41 

.30 

19 

43 

38 

6.48 

.51 

14.73 

.65 

43 

—.06 

35 

39 

27 

6.26 

.59 

14.39 

.68 

47 

.03 

31 

37 

32 

6.20 

.57 

14.36 

.67 

52 

—.45 

59 

22 

19 

13.75 

.64 

68 

.08 

25 

43 

32 

6.H 

;s9 

14.55 

.60 

70 

.10 

31 

40 

29 

14.23 

.68 

74 

.04 

33 

34 

33 

eloo 

!5S 

14.34 

.68 

76 

.16 

24 

47 

29 

6.25 

.48 

14.48 

.52 

77 

.34 

22 

36 

41 

6.89 

.62 

14.73 

.75 

79 

.10 

32 

38 

30 

14.38 

.73 

82 

.01 

27 

49 

24 

14.44 

.55 

All 

.17 

27 

40 

33 

6133 

156 

14.49 

.68 

Class  D 

3 

.08 

28 

SO 

22 

6.36 

.46 

14.46 

.55 

21 

.39 

14 

39 

47 

6.44 

.38 

14.83 

.65 

27 

.37 

23 

30 

47 

6.25 

.51 

14.66 

.70 

28 

.22 

18 

47 

35 

6. 45 

.44 

14.65 

.57 

50 

.04 

21 

57 

21 

6.40 

.27 

14.51 

.44 

55 

.09 

27 

47 

26 

6.18 

.52 

14.43 

.65 

61 

.47 

17 

42 

41 

6.40 

.37 

14.69 

.66 

64 

.45 

18 

36 

45 

6.50 

.44 

14.91 

.72 

83 

—  .09 

31 

47 

22 

6.4S 

.33 

14.37 

.52 

90 

.32 

17 

49 

34 

14.66 

.51 

91 

.43 

12 

45 

43 

6130 

;4S 

14.65 

.56 

All 

.27 

21 

44 

35 

6.37 

.49 

14.58 

.60 

Class  E 

38 

.46 

14 

SO 

36 

6.44 

.41 

14.55 

.81 

69 

—.03 

27 

55 

18 

6.40 

.46 

14.38 

.54 

87 

.38 

13 

38 

SO 

15.00 

.59 

88 

.35 

17 

43 

39 

6.06 

1.66 

14.50 

.42 

89 

.42 

21 

46 

46 

6.70 

.39 

15.00 

.81 

All 

.28 

20 

46 

34 

6.40 

.57 

14.64 

.74 

All  Annual 

.33 

26 

40 

34 

6.40 

.51 

14.52 

.70 

All  Ann.  and  Sem. 

.28 

30 

31 

39 

6.36 

.55 

14.45 

.67 

median  age  of  entrance  to  both  elementary  and  high  school  is  given. 
It  will  be  noted  that  the  variations  in  the  age  at  entrance  to  high 
school,  13.75  to  15  years,  are  greater  than  in  elementary  school. 
This  is  to  be  expected  because  the  age  of  entrance  to  high  school  is 
influenced  both  by  age  in  the  elementary  school  and  by  the  policy 

[37] 


of  promotion  practiced.   The  variations  in  the  age-grade  indices  are 
also  significant. 

Influence  of  size  of  city  and  frequency  of  promotion  upon  age- 
grade  indices.  A  comparison  of  Tables  XI\"  and  X\'  shows  that 
the  average  over-ageness  and  the  percents  of  pupils  over-age  and 
under-age  are  larger  for  schools  having  semester  promotions.  This 
is  probably  due  to  the  greater  flexibility  of  the  semi-annual  plan  of 
promotion.  A  similar  condition  exists  in  the  case  of  high  schools  for 
the  percent  of  pupils  under-age  and  the  percent  over-age.  A  com- 
parison of  the  age-grade  indices  for  the  different  classes  of  schools 
does  not  indicate  that  the  size  of  the  school  system  is  a  potent 
factor  in  determining  the  magnitude  of  these  indices.  Neither  is  it 
apparent  that  the  size  of  the  clvy  has  any  effect  upon  the  ages  at 
which  pupils  enter  school.  In  the  case  of  high  schools  there  is  a 
slight  tendency  for  the  age  of  entrance  to  be  greater  in  the  small 
svstems. 


[38] 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE  RELIABILITY  OF  AGE-GRADE  INDICES  AS  MEAS- 
URES OF  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHILDREN 
THROUGH  A  SCHOOL  SYSTEM 

Major  problem  of  this  study.  As  stated  on  page  9  the  major 
problem  of  this  study  is  to  determine  the  reliabiUty  or  accurac}''  of 
age-grade  indices  as  measures  of  the  progress  of  pupils  through  a 
school  system.  Before  discussing  this  question,  two  of  the  minor 
problem-s^  have  been  presented  in  the  preceding  chapters  in  order 
that  the  reader  might  be  acquainted  with  the  various  indices.  Age- 
grade  indices  are  more  easily  calculated  and  more  generally  used 
than  indices  of  progress,  but  are  influenced  by  age  at  entrance 
which,  as  we  have  shown,  varies  widely  between  systems  as  well  as 
for  individual  pupils  within  a  given  system.  Age-grade  indices  are 
also  affected  by  time  out  of  school,  but  this  applies  only  to  a  limited 
number  of  pupils.  The  major  problem  of  this  study  may  be  re- 
stated as  follows :  Is  the  influence  of  variation  in  age  at  entrance  and 
time  out  of  school  sufficient  to  limit  seriously  the  usefulness  of  age- 
grade  indices  as  measures  of  progress: 

Method  of  determiaing  reliability  of  age-grade  indices.  The 
indices  of  progress  summarize  the  actual  facts  in  regard  to  the 
progress  of  children  through  the  school  system.  Hence,  they  may  be 
accepted  as  valid  or  truthful  measures  of  conditions  existing  and 
may  be  used  as  criteria  for  judging  the  reliabilit}'  or  accuracy  of 
age-grade  indices  as  measures  of  progress.  In  Tables  X\TII  to  XXII, 
the  corresponding  indices  of  progress  and  age-grade  indices  for  the 
various  school  systems  are  brought  into  juxtaposition.  These  items 
have  been  taken  from  the  tables  given  in  Chapters  II  and  III. 

Comparison  of  average  over-ageness  with  average  progress  in 
elementary  schools.  In  Table  X\TII.  the  average  over-ageness  and 
the  average  progress  are  given  for  the  various  elementar\'  school 
systems.  The  cities  have  been  ranked  according  to  average  progress, 
beginning  viixh  cit)'  number  21,  for  which  it  is  .79.  An  examination 
of  the  table  shows  that  there  is  some  tendency  for  a  high  over-age- 

*See  page  9. 

[39] 


TABLE  XVIII.  AVERAGE  PROGRESS  COMPARED  WITH  AVERAGE 
OVER-AGENESS  IN  ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS 


City      Ave 

Tage 

Average 

City 

Average 

Average 

Number     Pro 

gress 

Over-ageness 

Number 

Progress 

Over-ageness 

21 

79 

.61 

72 

.90 

.12 

66 

80. 

1.04 

61 

.90 

.31 

49 

81 

1.01 

55 

.90 

.17 

81 

82 

.48 

14 

.90 

.35 

27 

83 

.27 

79 

.90 

.55 

26 

83 

.51 

1 

.90 

.48 

67 

83 

.50 

34 

.91 

.08 

74 

84 

.18 

23 

.91 

.32 

38 

84 

.38 

11 

.91 

.34 

24 

84 

.54 

8 

.91 

.21 

53 

84 

.49 

41 

.91 

.23 

33 

84 

1.02 

29 

.91 

.29 

46 

84 

.77 

15 

.91 

.22 

64 

85 

.41 

5 

.91 

.34 

20 

85 

.70 

35 

.91 

.88 

71 

85 

.59 

65 

.91 

.47 

40 

85 

.53 

25 

.91 

.26 

60 

85 

.55 

28 

.92 

.45 

51 

85 

.62 

75 

.92 

.16 

88 

86 

.65 

70 

.92 

.26 

43 

86 

.26 

12 

.92 

.48 

85 

86 

.42 

68 

.93 

.24 

52 

86 

.15 

56 

.93 

.17 

47 

86 

.57 

6 

.93 

.30 

84 

86 

.62 

45 

.93 

.01 

63 

87 

.29 

44 

.93 

.26 

19 

87 

.26 

22 

.93 

.51 

7 

87 

.58 

48 

.94 

.10 

58 

87 

.30 

59 

.94 

.38 

86 

88 

.35 

37 

.94 

.39 

80 

88 

.33 

10 

.94 

.40 

73 

88 

.36 

30 

.95 

—  .03 

2 

88 

.42 

42 

.95 

.38 

82 

88 

.25 

13 

.95 

.39 

69 

89 

.38 

50 

.96 

.05 

57 

89 

.14 

76 

.96 

.03 

17 

89 

.36 

31 

.96 

.06 

62 

89 

.42 

92 

.96 

.16 

39 

89 

.48 

9 

.96 

.42 

83 

90 

.3 

54 

.98 

.09 

77 

90 

.27 

18 

.98 

.14 

4 

.99 

.16 

ness  to  be  paired  with  a  low  average  progress  and  a  low  over-age- 
ness with  a  high  average  progress.  This  is  merely  what  we  should 
expect,  namely,  that  those  school  systems  which  have  a  high  aver- 
age progress  will  also  have  a  low  over-ageness.  However,  the  sig- 
nificant  feature    of   Table    XVIII    is    the   departure    from    perfect 


[40] 


correlation.  There  is  by  no  means  a  regular  decrease  in  the  average 
over-ageness  as  we  go  down  the  column  and  if  we  consider  systems 
having  approximately  the  same  average  progress  we  find  widely 
different  degrees  of  over-ageness.  For  example,  in  the  six  systems 
having  an  average  progress  of  .84,  the  average  over-ageness  ranges 
from  .18  to  1.02.  A  similar  lack  of  agreement  is  shown  by  the  cities 
having  an  average  progress  of  .91,  in  which  the  amount  of  average 
over-ageness  varies  from  .08  to  .88.  The  lack  of  correlation  may  also 
be  shown  in  systems  which  have  the  same  average  over-ageness: 
in  four  systems  with  an  average  over-ageness  of  .38,  the  average 
progress  is  .84,  .89,  .94  and  .95;  in  two  systems  with  an  average 
over-ageness  of  .51,  the  average  progress  is  .83  and  .93. 

The  coefficient  of  correlation  between  these  two  indices  is  .62, 
which  according  to  some  standards  might  be  interpreted  as  indicat- 
ing a  fair  degree  of  correlation.  However,  it  is  obvious  from  the  illus- 
trations cited  in  the  preceding  paragraph  that  the  relationship  be- 
tween these  two  measures  of  progress  is  not  close.  "Average 
progress"  is  an  expression  of  the  actual  rate  at  which  children 
progress  through  a  school  system.  Hence  the  "average  over-ageness" 
will  not  in  general  truthfully  indicate  the  existing  conditions  and 
should  not  be  used  as  a  measure  of  a  school  system  whenever  it  is 
possible  to  calculate  the  "average  progress." 

Comparison  of  percent  fast  and  percent  under-age  in  elemen- 
tary schools.  In  Table  XIX,  the  percent  of  pupils  making  fast  pro- 
gress and  the  percent  that  are  under-age  for  their  grade  are  given. 
As  in  Table  XVIII,  the  departures  from  perfect  correlation  are  con- 
spicuous. For  example,  if  we  take  those  systems  in  which  1  percent 
of  the  pupils  have  made  fast  progress  we  find  that  the  percent  who 
are  under-age  varies  from  8  to  28.  The  coefficient  of  correlation  be- 
tween these  two  types  of  indices  is  .38. 

Comparison  of  percent  slow  and  percent  over-age  in  elemen- 
tary schools.  Table  XX  presents  the  percent  of  pupils  making  slow 
progress  and  the  percent  of  those  who  are  over-age  for  their  grade. 
The  departure  from  perfect  correlation  is  somewhat  greater  in  this 
table  than  in  the  preceding  one.  The  coefficient  of  correlation  is  .28. 

Comparison  of  average  progress  and  average  over-ageness  in 
high  schools.  Table  XXI  gives  the  average  progress  and  the  average 
over-ageness  for  the  high  schools  which  cooperated  in  this  investiga- 
tion. The  agreement  between  the  two  indices  is  much  less  than  that 
shown  by  Table  XVIII  for  the  corresponding  indices  of  elementary 

[41] 


TABLE  XIX.    PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  MAKING  FAST  PROGRESS 
COMPARED   WITH   PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  UNDER-AGE 
IN  ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS 


City- 

Percent 

Percent 

City 

Percent 

Percent 

Number 

Fast 

Under-age 

Number 

Fast 

Under-age 

2 

0 

15 

8 

2 

22 

20 

0 

15 

19 

2 

20 

27 

0 

25 

26 

2 

18 

28 

0 

16 

38 

2 

18 

72 

0 

28 

55 

2 

20 

81 

0 

19 

61 

2 

25 

88 

0 

12 

29 

3 

19 

75 

.2 

22 

11 

3 

16 

24 

.4 

16 

68 

3 

18 

57 

.4 

24 

74 

3 

25 

51 

17 

33 

3 

13 

15 

27 

40 

4 

17 

31 

26 

62 

4 

9 

47 

15 

6 

4 

24 

48 

26 

46 

4 

17 

66 

8 

84 

4 

23 

67 

22 

49 

4 

9 

71 

* 

22 

35 

4 

12 

76 

24 

41 

5 

20 

82 

20 

50 

5 

25 

85 

21 

25 

5 

33 

17 

23 

56 

6 

29 

21 

14 

37 

6 

21 

30 

28 

52 

7 

27 

34 

26 

39 

7 

23 

43 

25 

1 

7 

25 

63 

15 

44 

7 

31 

64 

17 

65 

7 

29 

69 

18 

42 

8 

20 

73 

19 

14 

9 

32 

77 

25 

12 

9 

22 

80 

17 

22 

9 

23 

83 

15 

10 

10 

24 

86 

21 

92 

10 

32 

59 

24 

79 

10 

22 

58 

2 

22 

18 

11 

40 

60 

2 

17 

13 

16 

26 

5 

2 

30 

9 

17 

26 

45 

2 

25 

54 

22 

38 

53 

2 

19 

4 

25 

42 

70 

2 

20 

23 

44 

24 

7 

2 

12 

[42] 


TABLE  XX.    PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  MAKL\G  SLOW  PROGRESS 

COMPARED  WITH  PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  OVER-AGE  IN 

ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS 


City 

Percent 

Percent 

City- 

Percent 

Percent 

Number 

Slow 

Over-age 

Number 

Slow 

Over-age 

31 

9 

24 

73 

28 

38 

30 

13 

20 

7 

29 

40 

45 

14 

19 

63 

29 

29 

76 

14 

19 

86 

29 

35 

48 

15 

27 

22 

29 

50 

50 

15 

22 

58 

30 

34 

59 

17 

42 

47 

30 

40 

57 

18 

27 

60 

31 

44 

54 

18 

32 

41 

31 

27 

5 

19 

34 

43 

31 

32 

29 

19 

31 

80 

31 

29 

6 

19 

33 

1 

31 

48 

55 

19 

28 

25 

31 

40 

68 

19 

27 

55 

31 

63 

18 

19 

32 

71 

32 

42 

75 

20 

25 

17 

32 

37 

72 

20 

25 

19 

32 

32 

70 

21 

30 

12 

32 

48 

23 

21 

34 

65 

32 

48 

11 

22 

32 

40 

33 

41 

56 

22 

30 

53 

33 

40 

10 

22 

45 

67 

33 

40 

15 

23 

30 

38 

33 

38 

34 

23 

21 

51 

34 

46 

42 

23 

42 

24 

34 

41 

44 

23 

41 

27 

35 

32 

62 

24 

39 

64 

35 

37 

77 

24 

34 

81 

35 

37 

37 

24 

46 

88 

37 

48 

92 

24 

37 

85 

38 

39 

8 

25 

29 

20 

38 

47 

61 

25 

35 

66 

39 

62 

9 

25 

46 

74 

39 

27 

4 

25 

38 

26 

40 

39 

82 

26 

32 

84 

41 

50 

14 

26 

34 

79 

42 

51 

69 

26 

36 

52 

44 

32 

2 

27 

37 

21 

44 

39 

28 

27 

38 

46 

44 

58 

83 

27 

26 

39 

46 

48 

13 

27 

49 

33 

46 

62 

49 

56 

68 

[43] 


TABLE  XXI.  AVERAGE  PROGRESS  COMPARED  WITH  AVERAGE 
OVER- AGEN ESS  IN  HIGH  SCHOOLS 


City 

Average 

Average 

City 

Average 

Average 

Number 

Progress 

Over-ageness 

Number 

Progress 

Over-ageness 

4 

.73 

.46 

53 

.94 

.32 

34 

.74 

.49 

2 

.94 

.24 

15 

.79 

.14 

9 

.94 

.24 

70 

.80 

.10 

16 

.95 

.31 

91 

.82 

.43 

82 

.95 

.01 

38 

.83 

.46 

64 

.95 

.45 

47 

.84 

.03 

83 

.95 

—  .09 

27 

.85 

.37 

6 

.96 

.16 

84 

.86 

.27 

8 

.96 

.34 

61 

.86 

.47 

3 

.96 

.08 

36 

.87 

.61 

55 

.96 

.09 

74 

.87 

.04 

5 

.96 

.77 

79 

.87 

.10 

23 

.97 

.25 

88 

.87 

.35 

69 

.97 

—  .03 

76 

.89 

.16 

68 

.98 

.08 

20 

.91 

.46 

90 

.98 

.32 

52 

.91 

—  .45 

78 

.98 

—  .09 

77 

.91 

.34 

51 

.98 

.62 

89 

.91 

.42 

18 

.98 

.63 

65 

.92 

.30 

50 

.99 

.04 

59 

.92 

.23 

32 

.99 

.07 

13 

.93 

—  .53 

86 

.99 

.33 

41 

.93 

.30 

21 

1.00 

.39 

43 

.93 

—  .06 

28 

1.00 

.22 

25 

.93 

.31 

38 

1.04 

.12 

I 


schools,  the  coefficient  of  correlation  being  only  .12.  As  the  probable 
error  of  this  coefficient  is  .10,  it  can  not  be  said  that  it  shows  any 
correlation  at  all.  Tables  corresponding  to  XIX  and  XX  are  not 
given  for  high  schools,  but  the  correlations  between  the  correspond- 
ing indices  are  so  low  that  no  relationship  is  indicated. 

Variations  in  average  age  at  entrance,  potent  cause  of  unrelia- 
bility of  age-grade  indices.  The  fact  that  the  various  age-grade 
indices  do  not  correlate  more  highly  with  the  indices  of  progress  is 
due  largely  to  the  variations  in  the  average  age  of  entrance  in  the 
various  school  systems.  In  calculating  age-grade  indices  chrono- 
logical age  and  grade  location  are  taken  as  a  basis  (see  page  31). 
Pupils  who  enter  late  will  be  over-age,  unless  they  are  allowed  to 
skip,  even  though  they  never  fail  of  promotion.  On  the  other  hand, 
pupils  who  enter  school  when  younger  than  the  normal  age  will  be 
under-age  provided  they  do  not  fail,  even  though  they  never  skip  a 
grade.   In  elementary  schools,  the  correlation  between  average  over- 


[44] 


ageness  and  average  age  at  entrance  is  almost  exactly  the  same  as 
that  between  average  over-ageness  and  average  progress.  In  the 
case  of  high  schools  the  former  Is  considerably  higher.  Thus,  on  the 
whole,  it  is  evident  that  age  at  entrance  is  a  more  potent  factor  than 
progress  in  determining  age  in  grade.  Time  out  of  school  also  affects 
the  age-grade  indices.  Hence  it  is  apparent  that  we  should  expect 
age-grade  indices  to  be  reliable  measures  of  the  rate  at  which  pupils 
advance  through  a  school  system. 

Conclusion  with  reference  to  the  use  of  age-grade  indices.  The 
traditional  age-grade  table  as  well  as  certain  indices  may  be  helpful 
to  an  administrator  in  the  study  of  existing  conditions  or  occasion- 
ally even  in  comparing  his  system  with  another.  However,  the  facts 
presented  in  this  chapter  show  very  clearly  that  age-grade  indices, 
though  easily  calculated,  are  very  poor  measures  of  the  progress 
of  children.  The  rate  at  which  pupils  progress  through  the  grades 
is,  in  the  opinion  of  the  writer,  a  more  significant  measure  of  the 
general  efficiency  of  a  school  system. 


[45] 


CHAPTER  V 
THE  HOLDING  POWER  OF  THE  SCHOOL 

Holding  power  an  important  index  of  school  efficiency.   If  we 

consider  the  school  from  the  standpoint  of  the  service  which  it 
renders  to  the  community,  the  extent  to  which  it  holds  children  in 
school  is  a  significant  index  of  Its  efficiency  in  fulfilling  its  social 
function.  In  Illinois,  children  are  required  to  attend  school  until 
they  are  fourteen,  and,  under  certain  conditions,  until  they  are  six- 
teen. Since  prior  to  the  age  of  fourteen,  attendance  is  due  primarily 
to  the  compulsory  attendance  law,  the  holding  power  of  the  school 
does  not  become  apparent  until  children  have  reached  that  age. 

Method  of  calculating  indices  of  holding  power.  "Holding 
power"  may  be  defined  as  the  quotient  of  the  number  of  children 
above  the  age  of  fourteen  actually  in  school  divided  by  the  number 
that  should  be  in  school.  It  Is  relatively  easy  to  ascertain  the  number 
of  children  above  the  age  of  fourteen  who  are  enrolled  in  the  public 
schools,  as  It  Is  necessary  only  to  subtract  from  the  total  enrollment 
for  these  ages  those  children  who  do  not  reside  within  the  district. 
The  divisor  is  much  more  difficult  to  obtain.  In  the  first  place  the 
census  data  are  seldom  if  ever  assembled  so  as  to  show  the  number 
of  children  belonging  to  each  age-group,  fourteen-year-old  children, 
fifteen-year-old  children,  etc.  Even  if  this  Information  were  avail- 
able, the  figures  would  need  to  be  corrected  for  pupils  who  have  com- 
pleted the  twelfth  grade.  Attendance  at  private  and  parochial 
schools,  since  it  is  not  at  all  constant  from  community  to  commun- 
ity, would  be  a  disturbing  factor. 

As  It  is  not  feasible  to  use  the  census  data,  It  becomes  necessary 
to  estimate  the  number  of  children  belonging  tothe  various  age-groups 
who  should  be  in  school.  These  estimates  are  based  upon  the 
number  of  children  belonging  to  age-groups  within  the  boundaries 
of  compulsory  attendance;  for,  unless  there  is  a  failure  to  enforce 
this  law,  practically  all  pupils  of  these  ages  are  found  in  some 
school,  public,  private  or  parochial.  In  a  particular  community  the 
number  of  pupils  belonging  to  the  successive  age-groups  varies.  For 
example,  it  would  not  be  unusual  to  find  117  eight-year-old  children, 
100  nine-year-old  children,  95  ten-year-old  children  and  109  eleven- 

[46] 


year-old  children.  Since  such  variations  may  be  relatively  large  in 
small  school  systems,  it  is  necessary  to  base  our  estimates  on  pupils 
belonging  to  several  age-groups. 

Ayres^  took  the  average  of  the  number  of  children  belonging  to 
the  age-groups  from  7  to  12  inclusive  as  the  size  of  the  "standard 
age-group."  Thorndike^  appears  not  to  have  used  a  systematic  pro- 
cedure in  making  his  estimates.  For  this  reason  it  has  seemed  de- 
sirable to  use  the  method  proposed  by  Ayres.  In  the  present  study 
corrections  based  upon  estimates  furnished  by  superintendents  and 
principals  have  been  made  for  attendance  at  private  and  parochial 
schools.  The  average  of  the  number  of  pupils  of  ages  7  to  12,  which 
is  taken  as  the  "standard  age-group,"  is  approximately  the  number 
of  pupils  of  each  age  who  should  be  in  school.  No  correction,  how- 
ever, has  been  made  for  the  population  factor,  which  includes  the 
increase  due  to  births  and  the  decrease  due  to  deaths.  These 
changes,  taken  together,  operate  to  make  the  size  of  the  successive 
age-groups  slightly  smaller. 

Three  indices  of  holding  power  have  been  calculated:  (I)  Ratio 
of  the  average  of  the  number  of  12  and  13-year-old  pupils  to  the 
standard  age-group;  (II)  Ratio  of  the  average  of  the  number  of 
15  and  16-year-old  pupils  to  the  standard  age-group;  (III)  Ratio  of 
the  total  school  enrollment  to  the  standard  age-group.  The  first 
index  is  essentially  a  measure  of  the  enforcement  of  the  compulsory 
attendance  law  rather  than  of  the  holding  power  of  the  school, 
but  furnishes  a  partial  check  upon  the  correctness  of  our  estimate 
of  the  standard  age-group. 

Indices  of  holding  power  for  Illinois  school  systems.  Our 
study  of  the  holding  power  of  Illinois  school  systems  is  restricted 
to  those  from  which  data  were  obtained  for  both  elementary  and 
high  schools.  Table  XXII  gives  the  three  indices,  expressed  in  per- 
cents;  in  the  first  division  those  for  "single  unit  systems"  are  pre- 
.sented;  in  the  second  those  for  "whole  systems  not  coterminous." 
The  variations  in  these  indices,  particularly  the  second,  suggest  that 
they  are  not  accurate.  In  four  Instances  the  ratio  of  the  number  of 
fifteen-slxteen-year-old  children  to  the  "standard  age-group"  is 
greater  than  100,  in  a  number  of  other  school  systems  it  is  less  than 


^Ayres,  L.  P.  Laggards  in  Our  Schools.  New  York:  Charities  Publicaiion 
Committee,   1909.    236  p. 

^homdike,  E.  L.  "The  elimination  of  pupils  from  school."  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Education  Bulletin,   1907,  No.  4.    Washington,   1907.    63   p. 

[47] 


1 


TABLE  XXII.    INDICES  OF  THE  HOLDING  POWER  OF  THE 
SCHOOL  SYSTEMS 


A.  Single  Unit  Systems 

B.  Whole  Systems,  Not  Coterminous 

City  Number 

Index  I 

IndexII 

IndexIII 

City  Number 

Index  I 

IndexII 

IndexIII 

2 

89 

52 

1086 

4 

109 

65 

1060 

9 

103 

46 

1049 

5 

99 

56 

1080 

13 

100 

34 

1005 

6 

87 

58 

1065 

15 

113 

54 

1074 

8 

97 

94 

1233 

18 

109 

112 

1282 

20 

95 

76 

1144 

21 

89 

91 

1130 

23 

96 

98 

1162 

28 

71 

37 

978 

25 

88 

66 

1113 

39 

97 

57 

1023 

27 

101 

75 

1256 

52 

95 

49 

1023 

34 

92 

65 

1058 

55 

100 

48 

1030 

38* 

98 

24 

896 

59 

116 

101 

1176 

41 

100 

85 

1182 

65 

105 

68 

1149 

43 

92 

77 

1159 

69* 

125 

53 

1054 

47 

119 

61 

1187 

76 

106 

95 

1223 

50 

116 

156 

1356 

77 

99 

68 

1123 

51 

98 

33 

973 

86 

108 

97 

1229 

53 

92 

55 

1054 

All 

101~ 

55 

1066 

61 

106 

60 

1065 

64 

71 

120 

1233 

68 

124 

52 

1051 

70 

83 

47 

935 

74 

83 

66 

1081 

79 

95 

40 

994 

82 

106 

59 

1036 

83 

109 

68 

1064 

84 

104 

52 

1063 

88* 

132 

42 

888 

All 

98 

55 

1056 

All  Entire 

Systems 

99 

55 

1062 

*These  systems  do  not  have  four-year  high  schools. 

50.  Certain  obvious  causes  tend  to  contribute  to  this  variability.  An 
examination  of  the  age-groups  for  individual  cities  reveals  that  there 
is  considerable  variation  especially  in  small  cities  in  the  number  of 
pupils  belonging  to  these  groups.  Consequently,  in  several  instances 
it  happens  that  the  age-groups  from  which  the  numerator  of  the 
ratio  was  obtained  are  unusually  small  or  large,  and  therefore  not 
representative  of  existing  conditions.  Attendance  at  private  and 
parochial  schools  contributes  to  the  variability.  In  the  case  of  whole 
systems  not  coterminous,  although  a  correction^  was  made  for  the 

This    correction    was    based    upon    an    estimate    by    the    superintendent    or 
principal. 

[48] 


differences  in  the  boundaries  of  the  two  divisions  of  the  whole 
system,  it  is  not  likely  that  this  was  done  with  a  high  degree  of 
,  accuracy.  Finally,  the  original  data,  particularly  In  respect  to  the 
ages  of  certain  children,  may  involve  errors. 

The  totals  for  the  two  groups  are,  however,  representative  of 
the  general  conditions  of  the  systems  from  which  data  were  ob- 
tained. If  allowance  is  made  for  the  population  factor,  it  appears 
that  practically  all  children  of  twelve  and  thirteen  years  and  almost 
60  percent  of  those  of  fifteen  and  sixteen  years  are  in  school.  If  we 
take  the  ratio  of  the  total  enrollment  to  the  standard  age-group,  we 
find  that  the  number  of  pupils  enrolled  in  elementary  and  secondary 
schools  is  nearly  eleven  times  that  of  the  average  of  the  age-groups 
seven  to  twelve. 

The  third  index  of  the  holding  power,  since  it  is  calculated  from 
the  total  residential  enrollment  of  the  school  system,  is  less  sensitive 
to  fluctuations  in  the  sizes  of  the  age-groups  above  fourteen.  It  is, 
however,  affected  by  the  amount  of  retardation,  which  we  have 
shown  varies  greatly  from  system  to  system. 

Index  of  holding  power  unreliable  for  small  school  systems. 
Although  we  have  no  basis  for  comparison,  as  in  the  case  of  age- 
grade  indices,  it  appears  that  the  variations  in  the  age-groups  and  in 
attendance  at  private  and  parochial  schools  are  such  disturbing 
factors  that  the  indices  of  holding  power  of  the  schools  which  we 
have  considered  here  are  so  unreliable  for  small  school  systems  as 
to  be  unsatisfactory.  It  is  possible  that,  because  of  his  acquaintance 
with  local  conditions,  a  superintendent  could  calculate  more  accurate 
indices.  It  is  believed  that  the  ratio  of  the  total  enrollment  to  the 
standard  age-group  is  preferable  for  the  small  school  system  but, 
since  it  is  influenced  by  the  amount  of  retardation,  care  should  be 
exercised  in  using  it  as  an  index  of  holding  power. 

Relation  of  holding  power  to  type  of  school  system.  The  dif- 
ferences between  the  totals  for  the  two  types  of  school  systems  in 
Table  XXII  are  too  small  to  be  significant.  Two  of  the  three  indices 
are  slightly  higher  for  single  unit  systems  than  for  whole  systems 
not  coterminous.  In  view  of  the  common  opinion  that  it  is  a  distinct 
disadvantage  to  have  the  elementary  school  and  the  high  school 
under  separate  control,  these  results  are  rather  surprising.  It  appears 
that  in  systems  having  dual  control,  the  holding  power  is  about  as 
great  as  in  single  unit  systems.  It  is  possible  that  there  is  a 
tendency  to  promote  pupils  more  readily  in  case  they  are  to  enter  a 

[49] 


to 

8 

X 

u 

X 

o 

X 
Q 

< 
PS 

< 

w 


o 
< 

a: 
u 
< 

b 
O 

o 

H 
Z 

u 

a; 

w 

Oh 


X 

< 


\o 

NO 

fS 

(N 

vri 

n 

VO 

so 

r-- 

r^ 

r-- 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CO 

<-o 

• 

o 

'"• 

o 

r-) 

o 



O 

— 

o 

^^ 



■^ 

— 

-H 

— 

tN 

fN 

cs 

fN 

fN 

CN 

OS 

^ 

o 

o 

fN 

- 

vo 

r^ 

r~- 

r^ 

OS 

oo 

fN 

CN 

fN 

fN 

CN 

«s 

r-t 

ro 

r^ 

■«t< 

so 

U-1 

"f 

'*' 

■<»< 

f 

•<»< 

■<*< 

r^ 

so 

SO 

o 

o 

o 

^ 

so 

SO 

r- 

r^ 

r- 

CM 

ro 

f^ 

•^ 

r^ 

g 

OS 

00 

oo 

u 

OS 

oo 

3 

OS 

l-M 

in 

b 

fN 

so 

On 

C> 

OS 

OS 

o 

OS 

OS 

•"■ 

fN 

u-> 

■<»< 

« 

-* 

oo 

so 

O 

O 

O 

o 

O 

O 

'™' 

'"' 

"■^ 

u 

^^ 

'■^ 

1—) 

o 

oo 

OS 

OS 

OS 

_i 

o 

OS 

Os 

OS 

OS 

o 

o 

O 

O 

^ 

O 

, 

1 

O 

O 

2 

O 

o 

oo 

oo 

oo 

t^ 

00 

oo 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

r^ 

r^ 

fN 

•-0 

so 

j_, 

o 

OS 

o 

O 

OS 

^ 

^^ 

^-^ 

*— * 

'— ' 

r^ 

CT\ 

oo 

•n 

oo 

r^ 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

oo 

oo 

oo 

u-i 

so 

wr. 

OS 

o 

c^ 

OS 

Os 

OS 

oo 

•^ 

, 

SO 

m 

O 

fN 

r*) 

ro 

CN 

fo 

ro 

ro 

<ri 

— 

-^ 

-< 

— 

w 

E 

,, 

ui 

o 

• 

o 

c 

E 

E 

E 

lU 

tr. 

C/2 

E 

3 
O 

c 

en 

E 

!n 

U5 

3 
O 

c 

C/3 

c 

o 

o 
U 

c 

'E 

lU 

£ 

c3 

C 

'(A 

^ 

< 

CA 

i^ 

< 

[50] 


high  school  under  separate  jurisdiction  or  that  the  high  school  under 
independent  management  makes  a  greater  effort  to  interest  pupils 
in  attending.  Another  possibility  is  that  dual  school  systems  are 
found  in  communities  which  have  a  stronger  sentiment  in  favor  of 
high-school  attendance. 

Distribution  of  pupils  by  ages.  In  Table  XXIII,  the  percents  of 
pupils  of  each  age  for  all  single  unit  systems,  all  whole  systems  not 
coterminous,  and  all  entire  systems,  may  be  found.  The  first  half  of 
the  table  gives  the  uncorrected  figures,  that  Is,  the  figures  for  the 
pupils  actually  found  in  school;  the  second  half  gives  the  figures 
corrected  to  allow  for  the  factor  of  population.  It  will  be  seen  that 
the  size  of  the  age-groups  from  6  up  to  and  including  12  is  very 
nearly  constant  but  that  beginning  with  13  there  is  a  decrease. 
A  marked  break  is  noticeable  between  the  ages  of  14  and  15,  at 
which  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  fourteen-year-old  pupils  appear 
to  drop  out  of  school.  Only  about  two-thirds  of  the  fifteen-year-old 
children  are  in  school,  less  than  one-half  of  the  sixteen-year-old, 
slightly  over  one-fourth  of  the  seventeen-year-old  and  one-tenth  of 
the  eighteen-year-old  children.  By  the  age  of  twenty,  one  in  a 
hundred  is  to  be  found  in  school,  and  above  that  age  only  a  small 
fraction  of  one  percent.  In  our  interpretation  of  this  table,  however, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  those  students  who  have  completed  high 
school  and  are  attending  higher  institutions  are  not  included  in  these 
figures. 

Distribution  of  pupils  in  the  several  grades.  With  a  standard 
age-group  of  100  as  a  basis,  the  number  of  pupils  to  be  found  in 
each  grade  has  been  calculated  from  the  data.  The  figures  given 
below,  which  should  be  read  as  percents  of  the  standard  age-group, 
include  attendance  in  public,  private  and  parochial  schools.  Those 
in  the  first  row  are  for  pupils  actually  found  in  school,  and  those  in 
the  second  are  corrected  for  the  population  factor.   The  eflfect  of  re- 

Grade 

I  II  III  IV  V  VI 

Uncorrected 123     110     111     108     107      97 

Corrected 124     112     114     112     112     102 

tardation  is  such  that  below  the  sixth  grade  the  number  of  pupils 
enrolled  in  school  is  greater  than  the  standard  age-group.  Beginning 
with  the  sixth  grade  the  effect  of  elimination  is  noticeable.  The 
number  of  pupils  enrolled  in  the  twelfth  grade  is  approximately  one- 
third  of  the  standard  age  group. 

[51] 


VII 

VIII 

IX 

X 

XI 

XII 

91 

79 

86 

63 

45 

31 

97 

85 

93 

69 

49 

34 

CHAPTER   VI 

THE  PERMANENCE  OF  THE  SCHOOL  POPULATION 

The  permanence  of  the  school  population  in  the  elementary 
school.  The  data  collected  in  this  investigation  make  it  possible  to 
identify  those  pupils  who  have  spent  their  entire  school  careers  in 
the  school  system  in  which  they  were  enrolled  in  September,  1922. 
A  measure  of  the  permanence  of  the  school  population  has  been  ob- 
tained by  calculating  the  percent  of  pupils  in  the  highest  grade 
of  both  elementary  and  high  school  who  have  spent  their  entire 
school  careers  in  the  same  system.  These  percents  for  elementary 
school  systems  having  semester  promotions  are  given  in  Table 
XXI\';  for  systems  having  annual  promotions,  in  Table  XXV.   The 


TABLE  XXIV.    PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  IN  THE  HIGHEST  GRADE  OF 

ELEMENTARY   SCHOOLS   HAVING   SEMESTER   PROMOTIONS 

TIL\T  HA\'E  SPENT  THEIR  WHOLE  SCHOOL  CAREERS 

IN  THE  SAME  SCHOOL  SYSTEM 


City  Number 

Percent 

City  Number 

Percent 

Class  I 

Class  III 

9 

69.9 

1 

25.0 

10 

100.0 

22 

30.3 

37 

58.8 

25 

42.9 

92 

44.3 

33 

52.3 

All 

68.9 

42 

75.0 

44 

64.4 

49 

33.3 

Class  II 

54 

48.1 

12 

44.6 

65 

48.7 

13 

73.5 

79 

70.0 

39 

59.4 

All 

46.4 

46 

59.5 

84 

64.7 

All 

56.3 

Class  IV 

4 

50.0 

18 

58.1 

35 

12.5 

59 

60.7 

All 

35.0 

All  Semester 

52.2 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

56.5 

[52] 


TABLE  XXV.   PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  IN  THE  HIGHEST  GIL\DE  OF 

ELEMENTARY   SCHOOLS    HAVING   ANNUAL   PROMOTIONS 

THAT  HA\T  SPENT  THEIR  WHOLE  SCHOOL  CAREERS 

IN  THE  S.\ME  SCHOOL  SYSTEM 


City  Number 

Percent 

City  Number 

Percent 

Class  II 

Class  IV — Cont. 

51 

65.1 

23 

50.0 

58 

60.0 

24 

34.0 

60 

35.4 

26 

88.5 

All 

57.1 

27 

57.1 

28 

64.5 

Class  III 

30 

75.7 

5 

59.6 

34 

73.8 

15 

46.3 

38 

37.5 

29 

41.1 

43 

62.5 

31 

10.8 

50 

58.8 

40 

81.3 

55 

47.6 

41 

58.0 

56 

62.5 

45 

50.0 

57 

52.4 

47 

69.0 

61 

50.0 

48 

43.4 

63 

47.6 

52 

71.4 

64 

81.8 

53 

67.2 

68 

80.3 

62 

50.0 

69 

75.0 

66 

67.1 

72 

62.5 

67 

61.0 

73 

54.3 

70 

70.2 

74 

69.6 

71 

41.2 

77 

52.5 

75 

65.1 

80 

62.9 

76 

56.9 

81 

69.6 

82 

45.5 

83 

72.2 

85 

52.2 

86 

56.9 

.     All 

54.5 

88 

42.9 

All 

61.5 

Class  IV 

2 

57.1 

All  Annual 

57.4 

6 

81.1 

All  Ann.  and  Sem. 

56.5 

7 

57.7 

8 

72.2 

Rural 

11 

64.5 

1 

62.7 

14 

71.8 

2 

52.9 

17 

68.6 

3 

48.7 

19 

58.8 

4 

89.3 

20 

71.4 

All 

53.7 

21 

88.9 

1 

[53] 


TABLE  XXVI.  PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  IN  THE  HIGHEST  GRADE  OF  HIGH 

SCHOOLS  HAVING  SEMESTER  PROMOTIONS  THAT  HAVE 

SPENT  THEIR  WHOLE  HIGH-SCHOOL  CAREERS 

IN  THE  SAME  SCHOOL  SYSTEM 


City  Number 

Percent 

City  Number 

Percent 

Class  A 

Class  C 

9 

69.8 

4 

100.0 

39 

92.9 

18 

83.3 

78 

81.6 

32 

100.0 

All 

75.3 

59 

100.0 

86 

80.0 

All 

86.0 

Class  B 

5 

100.0 

25 

100.0 

All  Semester 

84.4 

51 

100.0 

All  Sem.  and  Ann. 

89.6 

65 

80.0 

84 

100.0 

All 

95.6 

variability  of  this  index  of  permanence  of  the  school  population  is 
the  conspicuous  feature  of  these  tables:  in  some  systems  all  of  the 
children  who  were  enrolled  in  the  eighth  grade  in  September,  1922, 
have  spent  their  entire  school  careers  in  that  system;  on  the  other 
hand  in  one  system  less  than  one  pupil  out  of  every  nine  in  the 
eighth  grade  has  received  all  of  his  schooling  in  the  system.  The 
general  tendency  is  for  slightly  more  than  one-half  of  the  pupils  in 
the  eighth  grade  to  have  been  in  the  same  school  system  since  they 
first  entered  school.  The  permanence  of  pupils  in  city  schools  is 
slightly  greater  than  that  in  rural  schools. 

The  permanence  of  the  school  population  in  high  school.  Tables 
XXVI  and  XXVII  give  the  percents  of  pupils  in  the  highest  grade 
of  the  high  school  who  have  spent  their  whole  high-school  careers  in 
the  same  system.  Between  one-third  and  one-half  of  the  schools 
show  100  percent  permanence;  a  number  give  an  index  of  less  than 
.80;  the  average  for  all  schools  is  slightly  less  than  .90.  In  no  case 
is  the  index  of  permanence  as  low  as  in  many  of  the  elementary 
school  systems.  This  difference  is  to  be  expected  since  the  high  school 
includes  only  four  years  as  compared  with  eight  years  in  the  ele- 
mentary school. 

The  permanence  of  school  population  in  whole  systems.  In 
Table  XXVIII  the  indices  of  permanence  are  given  for  the  whole 

[54] 


TABLE  XXVII.  PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  IN  THE  HIGHEST  GRADE  OF  HIGH 

SCHOOLS  HAVING  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS  THAT  HAVE 

SPENT  THEIR  WHOLE  HIGH-SCHOOL  CAREERS 

IN  THE  SAME  SCHOOL  SYSTEM 


City  Number 

Percent 

City  Number 

Percent 

Class  B 

Class  D 

13 

95.1 

3 

92.3 

36 

100.0 

21 

80.0 

53 

85.1 

27 

90.0 

All 

91.6 

28 

100.0 

50 

90.9 

Class  C 

55 

100.0 

2 

85.7 

61 

90.0 

6 

94.4 

64 

87.5 

8 

100.0 

83 

100.0 

15 

84.2 

90 

100.0 

16 

96.6 

91 

100.0 

20 

90.0 

All 

93.8 

23 

91.7 

34 

100.0 

Class  E 

41 

97.8 

38 

83.3 

43 

86.4 

69 

100.0 

47 

80.0 

87 

100.0 

52 

72.7 

88 

85.7 

68 

83.3 

89 

100.0 

70 

93.9 

All 

95.7 

74 

85.0 

76 

84.8 

All  Annual 

91.8 

77 

100.0 

All  Ann.  and  Sem. 

89.6 

79 

100.0 

82 

96.4 

All 

91.4 

systems  from  which  data  were  secured.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that 
there  is  one  system  (No.  59)  in  which  100  percent  of  the  pupils 
enrolled  in  the  highest  high-school  grade  have  received  all  of  their 
schooling  in  that  system.  There  is  one  whole  system  not  cotermin- 
ous in  which  there  are  no  pupils  who  began  their  schooling  in  that 
system.  The  average  for  all  whole  systems  is  slightly  more  than 
50  percent. 

Relation  of  permanence  to  progress.  The  data  presented  in 
Tables  XXIV  to  XXVIII  are  in  themselves  of  little  significance  with 
reference  to  the  efficiency  of  school  systems.  It  is,  however,  frequently 
stated  that  the  shifting  of  the  school  population  tends  to  interfere 
with  the  progress  of  the  pupils.  The  average  progress  for  those 
pupils  in  the  eighth  and  twelfth  grades  who  had  been  in  the  same 


[55] 


TABLE  XXVIII.   PERCENT  OF  PUPILS  IN  THE  HIGHEST  HIGH-SCHOOL 

GR.\DE  THAT  RWE  SPENT  THEIR  WHOLE  SCHOOL  CAREERS 

IN  THE  SAME  SCHOOL  SYSTEM 


A.   In  Single  Unit  Systems 

B.   In  Whole  Systems,  not  Coterminous 

City  Number 

Percent 

City  Number 

Percent 

2 

71.4 

4 

50.0 

9 

56.1 

6 

5.5 

13 

78.0 

20 

35.0 

15 

42.1 

23 

33.3 

18 

2:i.2> 

27 

00.0 

21 

80.0 

34 

50.0 

28 

50.0 

38 

66.7 

39 

67.9 

41 

56.5 

55 

62.5 

43 

36.4 

59 

100.0 

47 

34.5 

65 

30.0 

50 

72.7 

69 

88.9 

51 

50.0 

76 

38.2 

53 

55.3 

77 

77.8 

61 

50.0 

86 

10.0 

64 

87.5 

All 

53.5 

68 

50.0 

74 

30.0 

83 

45.5 

88 

28.6 

All 

48.7 

All  Whole  Systems 

1 

51.7 

school  system  for  their  entire  school  careers  and  also  for  those  who 
had  transferred,  was  computed.  The  results,  given  in  Table  XXIX, 
show  a  definite  tendency  for  the  pupils  who  move  from  one  system 
to  another  to  make  less  progress.  It  should  be  noted  that  this  pro- 
cedure does  not  take  into  account  any  loss,  when  transferred,  due 
to  being  placed  in  a  lower  grade  in  the  system  entered. 


[56] 


H 
W 

CL, 

O 
CD  W 


Oi 

9  S 

OS  < 

Oh  C/0 


Lh 

O  r^  rJ  r4 

On  —  r^  r^-H 

OO 

_C 

OsOOO 

On  O  0\  On  On 

On 

<4i 

O 

■  -;  ^'  ^' 

■-;■■■ 

c3 

~-» 

'^^  O  ro  f 

CO  0\  CO  On  O 

,_) 

o  o  o  o 

O  iO\  On  ON  O 

O 

^; 

rt 

^ 

CAI 

1—1              1— 1    — H 

T- 1                                               »-l 

^^ 

^ 

■< 

en 

tv 

C 

en 

ct 

O 

C 

b« 

'Zj 

o 

E 

•S 

o 

■^ 

OJ 

;.^ 

S 

o 

C/5 

C/3 

o 

E 

-c 

ns 
U 

<mu< 

ci;moQw< 

c 
re 

c: 

en 

"re 

c 

3 
C 

< 

OJ 

C 

\ — ; 

CD 

< 

< 

X-* 

tN  O  O  ro 

ONf^  \0  O  NO 

oo 

a^  o  o  o 

r^  ^  oo  o  00 

On 

k. 

6 

■  ^  ^ 

.  ^ 

^ 

^ 

o 

s 

oo  n  o  t^ 

i— 1  oo  O  CO  C?N 

_ 

o 

OO-hO 

O  ON  ©  On  On 

O 

-<: 

OS 

^ 

V3 

"-"-"^  '^ 

—        — 

^ 

-« 

.bo 

en 

C 

.2 

en 

C 

P 

^ 

o 

.2 

CJ 

R 

S 

o 

C/3 

en 

re 

o 

<cau< 

E 

c 
re 

«5 

(U 

"re 

c 
c 

s 

3 
c 

< 

c 

CJ 

OO 

< 

< 

« 

o  o  ro  ■*  ro 

CO  ■<*<  r)  CO 

CO  ON 

6 

O  0^  On  O  (^ 

On  On  On  On 

ON  oo 

« 

O 

c 

C) 

-«; 

^ 

E 

oo  oo  r^  CO  lo 

^T*  ^*  ^*  ^^ 

Tt<   NO 

OS  CT^  ^  O  On 

On  On  On  On 

ON  On 

>-, 

re 

h;' 

C/3 

*"• 

« 

R 

s 

en 

C 

(Q 

"^ 

_o 

c 

E 

'*J 

.2 

bo 

O 

E 
o 

o 

(^ 

■S 

en 

""*  2  S  '*■  -— 

£  =  =  >  = 

-o 

Jt 

en 

ti 

«'-'< 

3      i-,i-<< 

c 

s 

re 

0-t 

rs 

Q 

u 

u* 

0^ 

tu 

1 

C 

\ 

tn 

nl 

3 

«*     re 

E 

C 

^    I, 

C 

=     3 

C/2 

< 

<  CC 

[57] 


CHAPTER  VII 

CLASS  SIZE  IN  ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS 

Source  of  data  relative  to  class  size.  The  data  with  reference  to 
the  progress  of  children  in  the  elementary  schools  were  collected  in 
such  a  form  that  it  was  in  most  cases  easy  to  determine  the  size  of 
class^  in  the  cities  cooperating  in  this  investigation.  Usually  the  data 
for  the  children  instructed  by  one  teacher  were  reported  on  a 
separate  blank.  In  a  few  instances  it  appeared  that  two  or  more 
teachers  were  instructing  a  large  number  of  pupils,  usually  from  60 
to  80,  in  one  room,  and  these  pupils  were  considered  as  forming  two 
classes  with  one-half  the  total  number  assigned  to  each  teacher. 
When  it  happened  that  one  teacher  had  pupils  from  two  or  more 
grades,  the  class  was  assigned  to  that  grade  to  which  the  largest 
number  of  pupils  belonged.  A  third  difficulty  was  encountered  in 
systems  having  departmental  work;  most  of  these  had  "home 
rooms"  and  the  number  of  pupils  belonging  to  a  home  room  was 
taken  as  the  size  of  class;  those  not  assigning  pupils  to  special  rooms 
were  not  included  in  this  study  of  class  size. 

Size  of  class  in  the  various  grades.  In  Table  XXX  the  distri- 
bution of  classes  with  reference  to  size  is  given  for  the  various 
grades.  The  first  division  of  the  table  shows  the  distributions  for 
city  school  systems  and  the  second  for  rural  schools.  It  will  be 
noticed  that  the  extreme  range  for  city  schools,  from  less  than  10 
to  more  than  75,  is  found  in  the  first  grade.  The  smallest  range, 
which  is  from  20  or  more  to  less  than  60,  is  found  in  Grade  V.  The 
median  size  of  class  for  all  grades  combined  is  36.4,  the  average 
36.7.  The  median  size  in  the  various  grades  differs  from  this  only 
slightly,  except  in  the  case  of  the  eighth  grade  which  is  about  four 
smaller.  In  general,  as  would  be  expected,  the  size  of  class  in  rural 
schools  is  much  smaller.  Most  of  the  rural  schools  from  which  data 
were  secured  have  only  one  room,  there  being  less  than  one  in  fifteen 
that  have  two  or  more  rooms. 


^When  a  teacher  had  charge  of  a  particular  group  of  pupils,  the  number  of 
children  assigned  to  her  was  taken  as  the  size  of  the  class  regardless  of  whether 
they  recited  in  one  group  or  were  divided  into  two  or  more. 

[58] 


u 


< 

—  sooor^o-«ctr~- 

c 
■-3 

r^<r5r^\o<~or--soinTt' 

"(5 

C^4<J-,vor^  —  CNa\-<CN 

fo 

1 

<N 

i 

r^ 

in 

(N  CS                               «  „  ^ 

i 

-™  CO  ■*  <~0          -<  CN          -^ 

1 

lO 

—                f 

—          — 

^ 

r^r^ONOvcNso'-o\ooc 

—      — 

—  CN  CN                               uo 

1 

O 

CN 

— ■                                      —  (N 

1 

Os^orocNclrooorouo 

CO 

_-„o 

o 

TfrjLor^coo\-*ror^ 

^'^COCO(NCOC0  04  00 

CN  (N        '-  -^        —        O 

CI 

■^CNCO— 'CSCNCNfOCO 
CN 

Tf  CN  CN                     vO  CO  r^ 

^ 

OooOO'vOO'nOOv 
O)  —  CJ  ™          ^  „  O)  — 

voONf^ONr^inoocN 

CO 
wn 

t 

O>0OCNCNCO  —  CNOOLO 

i 

-^                             -                    CO 

coO-^"^  —  ooooocr^ 

—  —  —  —'04          —          O 

1 

W-1 

'->                 —                               CN 

Tf  —  r^oo'^r-^O'or-- 

i 

■*  —                 CN          CN  04  — 

1) 

-o 

en 

s 
u 

8 

3 

[59] 


Comparison  with  a  previous  study.  In  a  previous  bulletin^  of 
the  Bureau  of  Educational  Researcli  certain  facts  were  given  relative 
to  size  of  class  in  elementary  schools  in  180  Illinois  cities.  The  in- 
formation was  secured  by  addressing  a  questionnaire  to  the  superin- 
tendents of  schools  asking  for  the  number  of  classes  of  various  sizes, 
and  was  obtained  for  each  of  three  school  years,  1918-19,  1919-20 
and  1920-21.  The  median  sizes  of  class  for  the  three  years  were  41.4, 
43.4  and  43.2.  These  are  distinctly  larger  than  found  in  the  present 
study.  There  are  certain  possible  explanations  of  this  difference.  In 
the  previous  study  results  were  obtained  from  many  large  city  school 
systems  while  in  the  present  study  few  such  systems  are  represented. 
Another  explanation  is  that  conditions  with  respect  to  size  of  class 
may  have  changed  since  the  data  for  the  preceding  studies  were 
gathered.  Furthermore,  it  is  likely  that  in  reporting  the  size  of  class 
the  superintendents  may  have  failed  to  include  certain  very  small 
classes. 

In  the  report  of  the  previous  study  there  was  included  a 
summary  of  the  opinions  of  superintendents  of  270  cities  having  a 
population  of  25,000  or  more  as  to  the  size  of  class  which  they  con- 
sidered ideal.  The  central  tendency  of  these  opinions  is  about  32. 
If  this  may  be  taken  as  a  norm  the  average  condition  in  Illinois  is 
not  distinctly  unsatisfactory,  although  there  are  still  many  classes 
which  are  too  large  for  efficient  work  and  some  that  are  too  small 
for  economical  instruction. 

Size  of  class  in  different  cities.  The  median  size  of  class  has 
been  calculated  for  each  of  the  cities  and  counties  from  which  in- 
formation was  secured.  These  medians  are  presented  in  Tables 
XXXI  and  XXXII.  It  will  be  seen  that  in  the  case  of  cities  the 
range  is  from  21.9  for  city  Number  8  to  56.5  for  city  Number  51. 
Even  in  cities  of  approximately  the  same  population  there  is  an 
astonishingly  wide  range  in  the  median  class  size.  It  is  likely  that 
these  variations  are  due  to  local  conditions  rather  than  to  differences 
in  the  judgments  of  the  superintendents,  for  the  size  and  number  of 
rooms  available  and  the  amount  of  money  appropriated  for  teachers' 
salaries  are  probably  the  most  potent  factors  in  determining 
class  size. 


^■'Relation  of  size  of  class  to  school  efficiency."  University  of  Illinois  Bulletm, 
Vol.  19,  No.  45,  Bureau  of  Educational  Research  Bulletin  No.  10.  Urbana: 
University  of  Illinois,  1922. 

[60] 


TABLE  XXXI.    CLASS  SIZE  DATA  FOR  ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS 
HAVING  SEMESTER  PROMOTIONS 


City  Number 

Median 

City  Number 

Median 

Class  I 

Class  III 

9 

36.3 

1 

27.9 

10 

32.3 

22 

39.4 

37 

36.0 

25 

37.5 

92 

30.1 

33 

47.3 

All 

35.1 

42 

26.7 

44 

27.5 

49 

26.9 

54 

30.6 

Class  II 

65 

30.4 

12 

36.7 

79 

37.5 

13 

36.7 

All 

33.1 

39 

39.3 

46 

44.6 

Class  IV 

84 

36.6 

4 

40.6 

All 

38.2 

18 

37.5 

35 

29.5 

59 

30.0 

All 

33.3 

All  Semester 

35.9 

All  Sem.  and  Ann, 

36.4 

The  quartile  deviations  and  the  total  ranges  of  class  size  for  all 
cities  have  also  been  computed  but  are  not  presented  in  this  report. 
They  show  that  in  many  cities  the  range  in  size  is  almost  as  great 
as  that  found  between  different  cities.  In  only  three  cities  is  the 
total  range  of  class  size  less  than  10,  in  over  one-tenth  of  the  whole 
number  it  is  40  or  more.  In  a  few  cities  the  quartile  deviations  are 
less  than  2.5,  which  means  that  one-half  of  the  classes  do  not  differ 
from  each  other  in  size  by  more  than  5.  On  the  other  hand  there 
are  some  cities  in  which  a  range  of  more  than  20  is  required  to  in- 
clude the  middle  one-half  of  the  classes.  The  fact  that  such  varia- 
tions are  found  within  a  single  system  supports  the  conclusion  ad- 
vanced above  that  class  size  is  chiefly  determined  by  other  factors 
than  the  opinion  of  the  superintendent. 

The  relationship  between  class  size  and  frequency  of  promo- 
tion and  size  of  system.  In  systems  which  have  annual  promotions 
there  is  a  tendency  for  the  median  class  size  to  increase  with  the 


[61] 


TABLE  XXXII.    CLASS  SIZE  DATA  FOR  ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS 
RWIXG  ANNUAL  PROMOTIONS 


City  Number 

Median 

City  Number 

Median 

Class  II 

Class  IV  (Cont.) 

51 

56.5 

23 

22.5 

58 

38.2 

24 

42.5 

60 

38.6 

26 

30.0 

All 

41.0 

27 

26.3 

28 

33.8 

Class  III 

30 

30.0 

5 

36.3 

34 

29.0 

15 

27.9 

38 

32.8 

29 

40.3 

43 

35.0 

31 

38.9 

50 

27.5 

40 

34.2 

55 

32.5 

41 

39.2 

56 

42.5 

45 

32.5 

57 

27.5 

47 

37.5 

61 

36.9 

48 

35.0 

63 

22.5 

52 

31.7 

64 

31.3 

53 

33.6 

68 

38.8 

62 

48.2 

69 

52.5 

66 

41.1 

72 

25.0 

67 

48.4 

73 

35.0 

70 

29.2 

74 

32.5 

71 

44.2 

77 

43.0 

75 

34.3 

80 

36.7 

76 

29.4 

81 

31.9 

82 

35.8 

83 

41.3 

85 

39.0 

86 

32.5 

All 

37.6 

88 

22.5 

All 

33.1 

Class  IV 

All  Annual 

36.9 

2 

23.8 

All  Ann.  and  Sem. 

36.4 

6 

33.8 

7 

32.5 

8 

21.9 

Rural 

11 

38.8 

1 

12.7 

14 

39.0 

2 

15.2 

17 

37.5 

3 

16.6 

19 

28.0 

4 

19.5 

20 

31.3 

All 

14.6 

21 

25.0 

total  enrollment.  This,  however,  is  not  shown  by  those  having  sem- 
ester promotions  so  that  on  the  whole  It  can  not  be  said  that  there 
Is  any  relationship  between  size  of  class  and  size  of  system.  Neither 
does  It  appear  that  there  Is  any  relationship  between  the  frequency 
of  promotion  and  the  median  class  size. 


[62] 


CHAPTER   VIII 

THE  EFFECT  OF  DEPARTMENTAL  WORK  IN 
THE  UPPER  GRADES  UPON  PROGRESS 

The  data  secured  with  reference  to  departmental  organization. 

Among  the  questions  asked  in  the  supplementary  questionnaire  ad- 
dressed to  the  superintendents  were  the  following:  "Is  the  work  of 
the  upper  grades  organized  departmentally?  If  so,  what  grades  are 
included?"  The  replies  show  that  the  departmental  plan  of  organiza- 
tion prevails  in  forty-eight  of  the  eighty-two  elementary  school 
systems  from  which  responses  were  secured.  Since  no  details  were 
asked  except  what  grades  were  included,  it  is  likely  that  in  many 
cities  for  which  a  departmental  organization  was  indicated.  It  applies 
only  to  certain  buildings  or  perhaps  to  certain  subjects.  In  other 
school  systems  the  work  is  as  fully  departmentalized  as  in  high 
school.     The  forty-eight  systems   are  distributed  as   shown  below. 

Number  of  Systems  Percent    of    Systems 


uiass 

Semester 

Annual 

Se 

m ester 

Anmial 

I 

2 

67 

II 

3 

0 

60 

0 

III 

7 

18 

70 

90 

IV 

2 

16 

50 

44 

All 

14 

34 

64 

58 

The  last  two  columns  given  above  show  the  percent  of  schools 
in  each  class  that  have  departmental  work.  For  example,  in  Class 
III  70  percent  of  the  schools  having  semester  promotions  and  90 
percent  of  those  having  annual  promotions  have  departmental  or- 
ganization. These  percents  do  not  indicate,  as  we  might  expect, 
that  departmental  work  is  much  more  prevalent  in  large  school 
systems  than  in  small  ones,  but  the  number  of  large  school  systems 
is  so  small  that  the  figures  may  not  be  representative  of  general  con- 
ditions. Of  the  forty-eight  systems,  twenty-five  reported  a  depart- 
mental organization  in  Grades  VII  and  VIII,  thirteen  in  Grades  VI 
to  VIII  and  ten  in  Grades  V  to  VIII.  In  addition  to  these,  two  failed 
to  specify  the  grades  in  which  this  type  of  organization  was  used. 

[63] 


TABLE  XXXIII.   A  COMPARISON  OF  PROGRESS  IN  ELEMENTARY 

SCHOOLS  THAT  HAVE  DEPARTMENTAL  WORK  IN  THE 

UPPER  GRADES  AND  IN  THOSE  THAT  DO  NOT 


Average 
Progress 

Percent 

Fast 

Reg. 

Slow 

Semester  promotions 

Departmental 

Non-Departmental 

Annual  promotions 

Departmental 

.91 
.91 

.88 
.88 

.89 
.89 

9 

7 

2 

2 

5 
4 

58 
58 

72 
68 

66 
63 

33 
36 

26     ' 

Non-departmental 

All 

Departmental 

30 
29 

Non-Departmental 

33 

TABLE  XXXIV.  A  COMPARISON  OF  PROGRESS  IN  HIGH  SCHOOLS  THAT 

HAVE  DEPARTMENTAL  WORK  IN  THE  UPPER  ELEMENTARY 

GRADES  AND  IN  THOSE  THAT  DO  NOT 


Average 
Progress 

Percent 

Fast 

Reg. 

Slow 

Semester  promotions 

Departmental 

Non-Departmental 

Annual  promotions 

Departmental 

.98 
.91 

.89 
.92 

.94 
.91 

11 
3 

1 
.3 

6 

1 

75 
78 

88 
91 

81 
86 

13 
19 

12 

Non-Departmental 

All 

Departmental 

9 
13 

Non-Departmental 

13 

Relation  of  departmental  organization  to  progress  in  elemen- 
tary schools.  The  indices  of  progress  for  the  two  types  of  elementary- 
schools  given  in  Table  XXXIII  are  so  nearly  the  same  that  one  is 
not  justified  in  concluding  that  the  departmental  organization  for 
instruction  affects  the  progress  of  pupils.    However,  since  the  index 

[64] 


of  progress  is  calculated  from  the  records  of  pupils  in  all  grades,  it  is 
not  very  sensitive  to  changes  in  the  organization  in  only  the  upper 
grades.  Thus  the  facts  presented  here  should  not  be  accepted  as  a 
conclusive  answer  to  the  question  of  the  value  of  departmentalized 
instruction.  In  Table  XXXIV  indices  of  progress  are  given  for  high 
schools  which  receive  pupils  from  departmentally  organized  elemen- 
tary schools  and  for  those  which  do  not.  In  the  case  of  school  sys- 
tems having  semester  promotions,  the  average  progress  in  high  school 
is  much  greater  for  pupils  coming  from  departmentally  organized 
upper  grades.  The  opposite  is  true,  though  not  so  markedly,  in  the 
case  of  high  schools  having  annual  promotions.  For  all  high  schools 
there  is  a  small  difference  in  favor  of  departmental  organiza- 
tion but  not  enough  to  warrant  the  assertion  that  departmental  work 
in  the  elementary  schools  does  result  in  more  rapid  progress  in  high 
school.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  progress  is  only  one  of  the 
many  criteria  by  which  departmental  work  should  be  judged. 


[65] 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  DISTRIBUTION  OF  ONE  THOUSAND 
CHILDREN  AT  EACH  AGE 

Method  of  computing  figures  presented  in  this  chapter.  Al- 
though practically  all  of  the  facts  in  this  chapter  can  be  obtained 
from  data  previously  presented,  they  are  given  here  in  a  different 
form.  In  Table  XXXV  is  presented  a  distribution  of  1000  children 
of  each  age,  showing  how  many  may  be  found  in  each  grade  of  the 
public  schools,  how  many  in  private  and  parochial  schools  and  how 
many  are  unaccounted  for.  The  figures  given  are  based  on  the 
assumption  that  the  average  of  the  number  of  7  to  12-year-old 
children  represents  the  normal  number  of  children  belonging  to 
each  age-group.^  In  making  the  correction  for  the  population  factor 
the  writer  has  assumed  as  the  rate  of  increase  from  year  to  year  the 
geometric  mean  of  the  increase  of  the  whole  state  except  Chicago 
from  1910  to  1920  as  shown  by  the  census. 

Data  as  to  number  of  pupils  of  each  age.  The  figures  given  in 
the  table  are  to  be  interpreted  as  follows,  using  age  six  as  an 
example.  Of  every  1000  children  of  age  six,  600  are  in  Grade  I,  183 
in  Grade  II,  9  in  Grade  III,  less  than  one  in  Grade  IV,  making 
a  total  of  792  in  the  public  schools,  166  are  enrolled  in  private  and 
parochial  schools  and  42  are  unaccounted  for.  This  last  term,  when 
used  at  the  lower  ages,  indicates  that  pupils  are  merely  out  of  school, 
whereas  at  the  upper  ages  it  probably  means  that  they  are  at  work. 
It  will  be  seen  that  from  the  age  of  six  up  to  and  including  fourteen, 
95  percent  or  more  of  the  children  appear  to  be  in  school.  The 
number  in  public  schools  varies  from  792  to  875  out  of  every  1000, 
that  in  the  parochial  schools  from  76  to  198  and  the  number 
unaccounted  for  from  0  to  56.  Above  fourteen  years,  however,  the 
decrease  in  the  number  in  school  and  the  increase  in  the  number 
unaccounted  for  is  very  rapid.  At  the  next  age,  that  of  fifteen,  less 
than  four-fifths  are  in  school,  at  sixteen  about  five-ninths,  at  seven- 
teen only  one-third,  at  eighteen  about  one-eighth,  until  finally  at 
twenty-one  only  one-tenth  of  one  percent  of  the  children  are  in 
school. 

'(See  p.  47) 

[66^ 


•a 

r^ 

(^ 

NO 

CN 

vO 

CS 

^ 

o 

«^ 

O 

r^t 

r^ 

r^ 

2  o 

OH 

- 

-^ 

- 

Cs 

CN 

00 

OO 

^ 

f^ 

£ 

>  rt  — 

Cv 

oo 

^ 

CN 

o 

O 

NO 

NO 

^ 

^ 

-*• 

o 

£^§ 

o 

CN 

^ 

O 

(TV 

^ 

c^ 

-f 

^ 

o 

Ln 

^O 

\o 

o 

o 

O 

LTi 

^ 

OO 

CN 

C\ 

CN 

CO 

00 

oo 

r*^ 

f!^ 

o 

f^ 

S 

1 

1 

g 

I 

^ 

' 

1 

1 

2 

.M 

^^ 

'-^ 

^ 

1 

'"' 

'^ 

C^ 

1— . 

_ 

r^i 

(-r-i 

r^ 

,^ 

r^l 

o 

1 

S 

r^, 

t^. 

r^ 

LO 

m 

O 

NC 

_ 

<r, 

^ 

T 

Ol 

CO 

r^ 

o 

r^ 

o 

" 

1 

' 

' 

'^ 

r^4 

"V" 

•Zi 

oo 

O 

•rf 

r^i 

,_ 

NO 

r^ 

O 

fn 

NO 

"" 

1 

1 

1 

'^ 

•^ 

NO 

r^4 

(*-^ 

Q 

(^, 

T- 

r*^ 

o 

oo 

f*^ 

LO 

r^ 

O 

1 

f^ 

t^ 

' 

"■ 

^^ 

-*> 

-«• 

^^ 

,-H 

■rr 

—1 

,-~ 

^ 

■^ 

r-H. 

O 

r^ 

"O 

ON 

U-1 

o 

cri 

1 

O 

o 

^^ 

1 

^^ 

^^ 

^H 

r^. 

CO 

^ 

,^ 

-C 

•~r, 

.-^ 

'^ 

oo 

fNl 

<r. 

•«• 

o 

< 

■" 

"" 

"" 

<-■. 

'^ 

00 

_ 

r-j 

CO 

CN 

o 

CO 

*-. 

urj 

m 

m 

c^ 

^^ 

o 

00 

O 

CS 

t^ 

lo 

'** 

^' 

*^ 

cvj 

^^ 

^« 

-^ 

:^ 

— . 

ON 

o 

l>^ 

sO 

— 

r-i 

L^- 

-J. 

* 

O 

r^ 

"^ 

"" 

^^ 

r^ 

'^ 

'^ 

cs 

00 

^ 

^ 

r^ 

rv-, 

^ 

'*r 

rs) 

(^I 

r^ 

.^ 

r^ 

" 

rj 

r*^ 

•^ 

30 

—' 

LC 

r*% 

^ 

c 

wi 

U-, 

O 

^m 

ii 

L/-, 

f^ 

O 

00 

tv) 

'"* 

"^ 

'^ 

^^ 

rv- 

U". 

J^ 

r^ 

r^ 

^^ 

^« 

r^ 

CTv 

^ 

o 

c*-j 

"■• 

^^ 

'^ 

r^ 

r^ 

"-^l 

CN 

r*~. 

•*^ 

OO 

* 
t 

00 

ON 

1 

ON 

•^ 

"" 

00 

rv~ 

fy-, 

l^ 

r^ 

,_, 

IJ-i 

^M 

*f. 

r^ 

vC 

o 

NO 

NO 

r<i 

-*■ 

o 

C-~. 

<^1 

o 

r^t 

SO 

(7n 

VO 

" 

' 

r^ 

1-^ 

QO 

ly-i 

o 

tr% 

rj 

(N 

r^ 

o 

o 

^^ 

On 

■<?• 

ON 

* 

■c 

CO 

^_ 

■* 

VO 

C> 

O 

o 

o 

!/3 

c 

.^ 

> 

O 

Cli 

™ 

0 

H 

c 

3 

o 

« 

*j 

s 

r; 

;j 

S 

-a 

u 

o 

1. 

C 

' 

— 

;s 

T3 

-^ 

;■, 

O 

c* 

>,« 

08 

ox; 

•n 

y 

', ' 

^ 

^H 

o 

►-* 

*^ 

c 

u 

0 

U  ^    C    i« 

J=  o  •-  « 

-a  c.  =  t 

c  V  o  > 

O  «i   «    u 

u  2  &*" 

l;J=     O    C 

Is  ^   C  efl 


T3    C    0-5 


>.c 


[67] 


Percents  of  pupils  in  each  grade.  The  figures  on  the  right-hand 
side  of  the  table  show  similar  facts  by  grades.  Out  of  a  population 
of  1000  children  of  each  age,  almost  1300  are  in  the  first  grade  of 
either  public  or  private  and  parochial  schools,  over  1100  are  in  each 
of  Grades  II  to  V  and  about  1000  in  Grade  VI.  In  other  words,  the 
effect  of  retardation  is  such  that  in  each  of  the  first  five  grades  of 
the  elementary  school  the  enrollment  is  larger  than  the  size  of  a 
year  group  of  children.  The  total  enrollment  in  these  six  grades  is 
over  6800,  an  excess  of  more  than  13  percent.  This  does  not  allow 
for  the  children  who  are  not  in  school.  From  the  seventh  grade  on 
the  figures  decrease,  except  that  the  number  in  the  ninth  grade  is 
greater  than  that  in  the  eighth,  until  by  the  twelfth  only  slightly 
more  than  one-third  of  the  children  are  in  school. 

The  enrollment  in  the  different  grades  may  also  be  compared 
with  that  in  the  first  grade.  If,  in  Grade  I  the  number  of  pupils  en- 
rolled is  considered  as  100  percent,  the  number  in  each  of  the  fol- 
lowing grades  may  be  represented  by  its  ratio  to  that  of  the  first 
grade.  These  percents  are  as  follows,  the  first  row  being  for  the 
public  schools  alone  and  the  second  for  all  schools.   On  this  basis  it 

Grade 

I  II        III       IV         V       VI       VII     VIII    IX        X        XI      XII     ALL 

Public  Schools 100    90    91    90    90    82    78    68    75    S^    40    29    888 

All  Schools 100    90    90    88    86    78    73     64    68    51     37    27    851 

can  readily  be  seen  that  the  enrollment  in  the  next  few  grades  tends 
to  be  about  nine-tenths  of  that  in  Grade  I  and  that  after  the  fifth 
grade  it  steadily  decreases  until  in  the  twelfth  it  is  less  than  three- 
tenths. 

Significance  of  data  presented  in  this  chapter.  Although  the 
figures  for  Illinois  do  not  compare  unfavorably  with  those  for  other 
states,  nevertheless  they  reveal  a  situation  that  can  not  be  viewed 
with  complacence.  The  fact  that  more  than  one  out  of  every  twenty 
children  at  the  ages  of  thirteen  and  fourteen,  one  out  of  five  at  the 
age  of  fifteen  and  almost  one  out  of  two  at  the  age  of  sixteen,  are 
out  of  school  shows  a  serious  condition.  As  the  number  of  children 
graduating  from  high  school  at  the  age  of  fifteen  or  less  is  so  small 
as  to  be  practically  negligible  and  at  sixteen  only  one-fourth  of  all, 
it  is  evident  that  approximately  all  the  pupils  who  have  dropped 
out  have  failed  to  complete  high  school.   A  large  proportion  of  them 

[68] 


have  not  completed  even  the  elementary  school.  The  retardation  in 
the  grades  presents  a  situation  also  v/hich  should  cause  concern. 
The  enrollment  in  the  first  grade  is  28  percent  larger  than  any  one 
year  group,  or  a  28  percent  retardation,  that  in  the  next  four  grades 
varies  from  a  10  to  15  percent  retardation.  The  fact  that  Table 
XXXV  gives  a  total  of  876  children  enrolled  in  the  ninth  grade  may 
appear  to  indicate  a  very  favorable  condition,  but  a  study  of  the 
body  of  the  table  shows  that  a  large  number  of  these  children  are 
over-age  for  this  grade.  Furthermore,  one  should  note  that  less  than 
40  percent  of  those  who  enter  high  school  survive  to  become  seniors, 
some  of  whom  are  not  graduated. 


[69] 


APPENDIX  A 

The  Forms  Used  in  Collecting  Data 
Immediately  below  is  a  reproduction  of  the  "questionnaire 
supplementary  to  progress  record"  which  was  filled  out  by  the  super- 
intendent or  principal  of  each  school  that  contributed  data. 
Following  this  is  a  copy  of  the  progress  record  itself.  First,  the 
instructions  to  teachers  for  filling  out  the  progress  record  are  given 
and  after  these  the  headings  which  show  the  items  of  information 
desired,  followed  by  a  portion  of  the  blank. 

Unr-ersity  of  Illinois 

College  of  Education 

Bureau  of  Educational  Research 

QUESTIONNAIRE   SUPPLEMENTARY  TO  PROGRESS  RECORD 

City Supt.   or   Prin 

1.  Do  you  have  annual,  semi-annual,  or  some  other  system  of  promotion? 

2.  Are  the  boundaries  of  your  elementary  school  district  the  same  as  those  of  the 
high  school  district? „ If  not,  approximately  what  percent  of  non-tuition 

high-school  pupils  come  from  without  the  elementary  district? 

3.  Are  the  city  limits  the  same  as  the  boundaries  of  the  elementary  school  dis- 
trict?  „ „If  not,  approximately  what  percent  of  non-tuition  elementary 

school  pupils  come  from  without  the  city  limits? 

4.  Are   the  city  limits  the  same   as   the   boundaries   of   the   high-school   district? 

_ If  not,  approximately  what  percent  of  non-tuition  high-school 

pupils  come  from  without  the  city  limits? 

5.  Approximately  how  many  children  who  would  otherwise  attend  the  elementary 

schools  attend  parochial  or  private  schools? 

What  grades  do  these   schools  include? 

6.  Approximately   how    many   children   who   would   otherwise   attend   high    school 

attend  parochial  or  private  schools? What  grades  do  these 

schools    include? 

7.  Do  you   have  kindergarten  or  sub-primary  classes? If  so,   what   is 

the  approximate  enrollment  therein  by  ages?  4  years ,  5  years , 

6  years _ ,  other  ages 

8.  Is  the  work  of  the  upper  grades  organized  departmentally? 

If  so,  what  grades  are  included? _ _ 

9.  Do  you  have  a  junior  high  school? If  so,  what  grades  are 

included? _ 

10.  Has  there  been  any  unusual  change  in  the  population  of  your  city  since  the 
census  of  1920? If  so,  what? 

11.  Approximately  how  many  children  of  ages   14  and   15  are  out  of  school  with 
work  permits?    14  years ,  15  years 

[70] 


DIRECTIONS  TO  TEACHERS  FOR  FILLING  OUT  THE  PROGRESS  RECORD 

The  teacher  should  first  see  to  it  that  the  blanks  at  the  top  of  the  Progress 
Record  are  filled  out.  Under  the  heading  "system  of  promotion"  underline  "annual" 
if  promotions  take  place  only  once  a  3'ear,  "semi-annual"  if  they  occur  at  the  end 
of  each  semester.  If  some  other  system  is  used  please  indicate  briefly  what  it  is. 
This  indication  should  be  entered  just  under  the  words  "annual"  and  "semi-annual" 
if  there  is  sufficient  room.  If  a  longer  explanation  is  required  please  make  it  under 
the  heading  "general  remarks"  on  the  back  of  this  blank.  The  "date  of  report" 
should  be  the  date  at  which  the  record  is  filled  out,  not  that  at  which  it  is  sent 
to  the  Bureau  of  Educational  Research.  The  headings  of  the  various  columns  in 
the  body  of  the  record  indicate  what  information  is  desired.  The  examples  given 
on  the  first  two  lines  and  the  following  additional  explanations  will  serve  to  make 
their  meaning  clearer. 

Column  1.  The  names  of  all  pupils  in  your  room  who  are  present  upon  the 
"date  of  report"  or  are  only  temporarily  absent  at  that  time  should  be  included  in 
this  column.  In  other  words,  the  Progress  Record  should  include  the  records  of  all 
pupils  who  are  considered  members  of  your  room.  In  the  case  of  rooms  having 
pupils  of  more  than  one  grade,  teachers  are  requested  to  enter  the  pupils'  records 
so  that  those  of  all  pupils  within  each  grade  are  together. 

Column  2.  If  the  pupil  is  a  resident  of  the  school  district  in  which  you  teach 
enter  an  "R"  in  column  2.  If  he  lives  outside  of  it,  enter  an  "N." ,  The  school  dis- 
trict should  be  interpreted  to  include  the  territory  supporting  the  school  system  by 
its  taxes  and  from  which  pupils  may  attend  the  school  without  paying  tuition. 

Column  5.  In  the  case  of  a  pupil  who  has  at  some  former  time  attended 
school  in  your  city  but  who  left  to  attend  school  in  some  other  city  and  later  re- 
turned to  your  city,  the  date  entered  under  "date  of  entering  school  in  this  city" 
should  be  that  at  which  he  returned  to  school  in  your  city.  In  other  words,  no 
period  of  attendance  at  school  in  some  other  city  should  have  intervened  between 
the  date  in  this  column  and  the  present.  The  same  rule  should  be  applied  in  the 
case  of  pupils  who  have  attended  a  parochial  or  private  school  and  later  returned 
to  the  public  schools. 

Column  6.  In  cities  that  have  the  annual  system  of  promotion  the  grade 
entered  here  should  be  entered  merely  as  a  number.  In  those  cities  that  have  semi- 
annual promotions  the  letter  A  or  B  should  accompany  the  grade  number  to  indi- 
cate the  semester.  In  the  two  examples  given  these  entries  have  been  made  on  the 
supposition  that  the  first  semester  of  any  year's  work  is  called  the  B  section  and 
the  second  the  A  section.  In  case  the  use  of  the  letters  is  reversed  in  your  system 
kindly  indicate  that  fact  under  "general  remarks."  The  grade  entered  here  should 
be  determined  in  the  same  way  as  was  the  entry  in  column  5. 

Column  7.  The  entry  in  this  column  should  be  made  in  the  same  manner  as 
that  indicated  by  the  first  two  sentences  concerning  column  6. 

Column  8.  The  entry  in  this  column  should  show  the  number  of  years  lost  by 
failure  since  entering  this  system,  if  the  system  has  annual  promotions;  and  the 
number  of  semesters  lost  by  failure,  if  the  system  has  semi-annual  promotions. 

Column  9.  The  figure  entered  here  should  show  the  number  of  years  or 
semesters  gained  by  skipping  grades.  The  same  rule  as  to  years  or  semesters  as  was 
just  given  for  column  8  should  be  followed. 

Column  10.  Under  "number  of  semesters  out  of  school"  should  be  entered  the 
number  of  whole  semesters  during  which  the  pupil  did  not  attend  school.  A  pupil 
should  be  considered  as  not  having  attended  school  during  a  semester  if  he  was 
present  such  a  small  portion  of  the  time  that  he  was  not  given  any  school  mark 
for  the  semester's  work  and  therefore  was  neither  promoted  nor  failed. 

[71] 


Column  11.  For  high  school  students  columns  1  to  10,  inclusive,  are  to  be 
filled  out  just  the  same  as  for  elementary  pupils  and  in  addition  the  information 
asked  for  under  column  11  "for  high  school  only"  should  be  given.  The  entry  in 
the  first  column  under  the  heading  ''number  of  semester  credits"  is  to  be  based 
upon  the  generally  accepted  definition  of  a  semester  credit.  That  is,  that  one 
semester  credit  is  to  be  given  for  a  subject  carried  for  one  semester  and  having  a 
daily  recitation  period.  Thus  32  semester  credits  are  usually  required  for  high 
school  graduation.  The  same  interpretation  of  a  semester  credit  applies  also  for 
the  column  headed  "number  of  semester  credits  lost  by  failure." 

Column  12.  In  this  column  should  be  entered  any  other  information  necessary 
to  a  clear  understanding  of  the  pupil's  progress.  In  most  cases  no  entry  will  be 
necessary  here. 

General  Remarks:  Remarks  concerning  the  whole  room  should  be  entered 
under  this  heading  on  the  back  of  the  sheet,  leaving  the  space  in  column  12  for 
remarks  concerning  individual  pupils.  If,  however,  a  remark  concerning  any  in- 
dividual pupil  is  too  long  to  be  placed  under  column  12  it  may  be  placed  under 
"general  remarks"  with  a  note  to  show  to  which  pupil  it  refers.  Any  explanations 
necessary  to  make  clear  the  status  of  the  pupils  in  your  room  should  be  given 
under  "general  remarks."  For  example,  if  part  or  all  of  your  pupils  are  in  a  section 
that  is  somewhat  ahead  of  or  somewhat  behind  the  place  indicated  by  their  grade 
this  fact  should  be  indicated.  In  the  case  of  departmental  organization  in  which  the 
pupils  may  be  carrying  certain  subjects  in  one  grade  and  other  subjects  in 
another,  the  fact  should  be  stated. 

Teachers  are  requested  not  merely  to  fill  out  the  record  according  to  the 
pupil's  memory  but  to  take  reasonable  care  to  insure  that  the  entries  made  are 
correct.  The  accuracy  of  certain  items  of  information  giv^n  can  be  checked  by 
comparing  them  with  each  other.  For  example,  in  the  case  of  Thomas  Brown  it  is 
apparent  that  if  he  entered  grade  IB  in  February,  1919,  and  progressed  regularly 
he  should  at  present  be  in  grade  4A.  The  entries  show  that  he  lost  one  semester 
through  failure  and  one  semester  through  absence  from  school.  Therefore  he 
should  at  present  lack  two  semesters  of  having  reached  4A,  or  in  other  words,  be 
in  3A.  Since  the  entry  in  column  7  shows  that  he  is  in  3A  at  present  the  various 
entries   check   and  are   probably  correct. 

As  soon  as  this  Progress  Record  has  been  completely  filled  out  it  should  be  re- 
turned to  your  principal  or  superintendent. 


[72] 


H  ;! 


X 

u 

til 

0 

oi 

a 

O 

_] 

U 

< 

z 

o 

u 

0^ 

h- 

< 

^) 

u 

D 

Q 

s 

u 

0^ 

O 

8 

< 

tt! 

= 

a: 

ll 
1    II 

;i: 

s 

1 

* 

» 

"        i  a  .  . 

• 

S 

.    itm 

-      e 

.     ill 

z-s'-s 

o      « 

Z-i3   a- 

-      ' 

6   ^ 

i      I 

11 

£     5 

-  '  >. 

^ 

?     ? 

9- 

•S 
1 

1     J 

Ei: 

■S            >^ 

?     ? 

■!        o 

^         ^- 

£5                2 

<     £ 

*  si  1 

<  —  j> 

=     = 

~            tl 

a:      z 

:: 

- 

< 
z 

d       J 

APPENDIX  B 

The  School  Systems  That  Participated 
The  school  systems  of  the  following  cities  and  towns  contributed 
data  for  their  elementary  schools,  their  high  schools,  or  both. 


Abingdon 

Chillicothe 

Harvard 

Mendota 

Altamont 

Clinton 

Harvey 

Metropolis 

Altona 

Coffeen 

Havana 

Minonk 

Amboy 

Colfax 

Hebron 

Momence 

Anna 

DePue 

Herrin 

Mt.  Carroll 

Areola 

Des  Plaines 

Highland 

Morris 

Assumption 

Dolton 

Hillsboro 

Naperville 

Atwood 

Downers  Grove 

Hinsdale 

NashvOle 

Aurora,  East 

Dundee 

Huntley 

New  Trier 

Aurora,  West 

DuQuoin 

Joppa 

Nokomis 

Bartonville 

Dwight 

Keithsburg 

Oak  Park 

Bloomlngton 

East  Alton 

Kewanee 

Oblong 

Blue  Island 

Eldorado 

Knoxville 

Onargo 

Bridgeport 

Evanston 

La  Salle 

Paxton 

Bushnell 

Franklin  Park 

Lebanon 

Pecatonica 

Carmi 

Freeport 

Lyons 

Pekin 

Carrollton 

Galena 

AicHenry 

Pinckneyville 

Carthage 

Galva 

McLean 

Pittsfield 

Casey 

Geneseo 

Macomb 

Rio 

Catlin 

Gilman 

Madison 

Tennessee 

Cerro  Gordo 

Glencoe 

Marion 

\'ictoria 

Charleston 

Glen  Ellyn 

Mascoutah 

Wataga 

Chenoa 

Granite  City 

Matherville 

Yates  City 

The  four  counties  which  contributed  data  were  DeKalb,  Knox, 
McDonough  and  Massac. 


[7+] 


APPENDIX   C 

Non-Resident  Pupils 

The  following  table  shows  the  number  of  non-resident  pupils 
reported  and  the  percent  that  they  are  of  all  pupils  in  school.  As 
was  stated  previously,  these  non-resident  pupils  were  not  included  in 
any  of  the  tabulations  made  except  those  having  to  do  with  class 
size.  To  the  data  presented  in  this  table  the  following  points  may  be 
added  which  are  evident  from  a  study  of  more  detailed  tables.  The 
percent  of  non-residents  in  elementary  schools  varies  from  0  to  21 
and  in  high  schools  from  0  to  55.  There  is  a  well-marked  tendency 
for  the  percent  of  non-residents  to  be  greater  in  the  smaller  systems. 


TABLE  XXXVI.    THE  NUMBER  OF  NON-RESIDENT  PUPILS  AND  THE 
PERCENT  THAT  THEY  ARE  OF  ALL  PUPILS 


In  City 

Schools 

In  Rural  Schools 

Grade 

Number 

Percent 

Number 

Percent 

I 

85 

1 

36 

4 

II 

93 

1 

20 

3 

III 

69 

1 

19 

3 

IV 

77 

1 

31 

4 

V 

60 

1 

20 

3 

VI 

84 

1 

19 

3 

VII 

147 

2 

20 

2 

VIII 

131 

3 

25 

5 

I-VIII 

746 

1 

190 

3 

IX 

677 

17 

X 

404 

14 

XI 

355 

17 

XII 

264 

17 

IX-XII 

1700 

16 

I-XII 

2446 

4 

[75] 


APPENDIX    D 

Kindergartens 

It  had  been  planned  to  make  a  study  of  kindergartens  and  of 
their  effect  upon  school  systems,  similar  to  that  of  departmental  or- 
ganization. With  this  in  mind,  a  question  was  asked  as  to  which 
systems  have  kindergartens  and  the  enrollment  in  each.  Only  thir- 
teen of  the  ninety-two  cities  reported  having  kindergartens  and  of 
these  two  did  not  give  the  attendance.  The  attendance  reported  by 
the  others  varied  from  2  to  237.  the  total  being  about  800.  These 
data  are  evidently  not  sufficient  to  form  the  basis  of  any  study  con- 
cerning the  effect  of  kindergartens  upon  elementary  or  high-school 
work. 


[76] 


